Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment (Level 1) - 2014

Coquitlam & Port Coquitlam, BC

Prepared for: City of Coquitlam, Coquitlam River Watershed Roundtable, Pacific Salmon Foundation, Metro Vancouver and British Columbia Institute of Technology

Prepared by: InStream Fisheries Research Inc. 1698 Platt Crescent North Vancouver, BC V7J 1Y1 Canada T: +1 (604) 837-9870

File no. COQHAB-0040

April 2015 Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 1

Executive Summary

Level 1 Fish Habitat Assessment Procedure (FHAP) evaluations were conducted on the mainstem of the lower Coquitlam River, from the Coquitlam Dam to tidewaters, in Coquitlam and Port Coquitlam, BC, during the late summer of 2014. Off-channel habitat was not generally included in this assessment. This assessment was undertaken to establish baseline data of the habitat quantity and quality as it pertains to salmonid production as well as provide a training exercise in L1FHAP for second-year technical students in the Fish, Wildlife and Recreation program at British Columbia Institute of Technology. The preliminary evaluation of habitat conditions showed that for this stream, while much of the habitat is of high quality, there are some deficiencies and areas of concern. While the upper reaches studied contained high quality boulder and riffle habitats, the lower reaches contained more spawning gravel. There were limited amounts of large woody debris habitats throughout the Coquitlam River which probably reflects the historic logging, damming and diking in the area. This report summarizes the data collected and will serve as a reference resource for future evaluations of how to best optimize fish production in the Coquitlam River. A training program was developed for the Fish Wildlife and Recreation Program (FWR) at the British Columbia Institute of Technology (BCIT). A classroom presentation was conducted with an associated one-day field instruction on campus. The students then conducted a supervised 2-day L1FHAP of a reach in the Coquitlam River.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 2

Table of Contents

1.0 Introduction ...... 6 2.0 Methods ...... 8 2.1 Level 1 FHAP ...... 8 3.0 Results ...... 11 3.1 Reach-0 ...... 11 3.2 Reach-1 ...... 12 3.3 Reach-2a ...... 12 3.4 Reach-2b ...... 13 3.5 Reach-3 ...... 14 3.6 Reach-4 ...... 14 4.0 Discussion ...... 16 5.0 Fish Wildlife and Recreation Program Training ...... 20 6.0 References ...... 21 APPENDIX A - Raw Data Collected by InStream Fisheries Research Inc...... 46 APPENDIX B - Raw Data Collected by BCIT Students ...... 76 APPENDIX C - Level 1 - Habitat Survey Data Form ...... 85 APPENDIX D - Level 1 – Coquitlam River FHAP Training Presentation ...... 86

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 3

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Parameter statistics, by reach, for the Coquitlam River collected during summer 2014...... 23 Table 2. Statistics for the various habitat types, by reach, for the Coquitlam River collected during summer 2014...... 24 Table 3. Disturbance indicators by reach for the lower Coquitlam River collected during November 2013. (EB=eroding banks, PD=most LWD parallel to banks, MC=multiple channels (braiding), MB=elevated mid-channel bars, DW=extensive areas of (unvegetated) bar, WG=large, extensive sediment wedges, and LJ/JM=recently formed log jams)...... 25 Table 4. Coquitlam River diagnostics of salmonid habitat at the reach level, 2014. Note that off- channel habitat, located greater than 5 m from the main-stem perimeter, was not assessed. ...26

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Map of the lower Coquitlam River study area and its defined study reaches...... 9 Figure 2. 2013 Mean daily discharge (m3/s) measured at Water Survey of Canada hydrometric station, 08MH002 Coquitlam River, at Port Coquitlam...... 28 Figure 3. Proportion of dominant cover types by reach in the Coquitlam River. (OV=overhanging vegetation, DP=deep pool, LWD=large woody debris, IV=instream vegetation, C=undercut banks, B=boulders ...... 29 Figure 4. Mean percentage of cover type (± SD) by reach in the Coquitlam River. (C=undercut banks, IV=instream vegetation, DP=deep pool, LWD=large woody debris, B=boulders, OV=overhanging vegetation ...... 30 Figure 5. Proportion of dominant bed material types by reach in the Coquitlam River. (R=bedrock, B=boulders, C=cobbles, G=gravels, F=fines ...... 31 Figure 6. Detailed proportion of dominant bed material types by reach in the Coquitlam River. (R=bedrock, B=boulders, LC=large cobbles, SC=small cobbles, LG=large gravels, SG=small gravels, S=sands ...... 32 Figure 7. Percent frequency of spawning gravels, by reach, in the Coquitlam River, summer 2014. (L=little suitable spawning gravels, H=extensive areas of spawning gravels; R=suitable for resident trout and char, A=suitable for anadromous salmon, AR=suitable for both resident trout and anadromous salmon ...... 33

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 4

GLOSSARY bankfull channel width - the horizontal distance perpendicular to the channel axis between the tops of the stream banks on opposite sides of the stream disturbance indicators - indicators of recent channel disturbances that may lower salmonid habitat values which include changes to bed characteristics, channel patterns, banks and large woody debris habitat unit - The level 1 fish habitat assessment divides each stream reach into strata consisting of distinct, naturally-occurring habitat units. Habitat units were classified as pools, riffles, glides or cascades based on differences in water velocity, morphology, local topography and substrate size. large woody debris (LWD) - a piece of dead wood within the bankfull channel width which exceed 2 m in length and 10 cm in diameter. Functional LWD (within the wetted width) is defined as that which influences channel geomorphology. pool frequency - pool frequency or mean pool spacing per bankfull width was calculated by dividing total reach length by the number of pools within a reach multiplied by mean bankfull width potential barriers - partial or complete blockages to movement by juvenile or adult salmonids such as culverts and disused bridges, landslides or bank sloughing, log jams, falls, cascades or chutes, and gradient barriers spawning habitat - areas where water depths are greater than 15 cm and water velocities between 0.3 and 1.0 m/s during the spawning season. For anadamous salmon, gravel patches should be 1-2 m2 in area with particle size between 10-150 mm. For resident trout and char, spawning gravel patches should be greater than 0.1 m2 in areas with particle size between 10- 75 mm. stream reach - a homogeneous section of stream channel, characterized by uniform discharge, gradient, channel morphology, channel confinement, and streambed and bank material wetted width - the horizontal distance perpendicular to the channel axis from water's edge on one side to water's edge on the opposite side

Source: Johnston and Slaney 1996

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 5

Acknowledgements

We extend our thanks to City of Coquitlam for facilitating and supporting this study. Metro Vancouver and Pacific Salmon Foundation provided funding and staff support. British Columbia Institute of Technology and the Coquitlam River Watershed Roundtable supplied additional monetary and labour support for the project.

Jason Ladell, M.Sc., R.P.Bio. Neil Mackinnon, B,Sc. Tech. Project Manager Fisheries Technician Instream Fisheries Research Inc. Instream Fisheries Research Inc.

Don McCubbing, M.Sc., R.P.Bio. Cynthia Fell, B.Sc. Senior Biologist Fisheries Biologist Instream Fisheries Research Inc. Instream Fisheries Research Inc.

Ladell, J., N. Mackinnon, D.J.F. McCubbing and C. Fell. 2015. Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment (Level 1), 2014. Report prepared for City of Coquitlam, Coquitlam River Watershed Roundtable, Pacific Salmon Foundation, British Columbia Institute of Technology, and Metro Vancouver. 156 p.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 6

1.0 Introduction

The Coquitlam River watershed is a 17 km-long, partially-urbanized watershed that drains 261 km2 of the North Shore mountains in the lower mainland, British Columbia (Figure 1). A dam on the Coquitlam River, constructed in 1914 and currently operated by BC Hydro, is located approximately 18 km upstream from its confluence with the Fraser River. The dam separates the watershed into the upper and lower Coquitlam River drainages. The lower Coquitlam River drainage is 79 km2 in area and includes over 30 tributaries. The largest tributary, Or Creek, drains 22 km2 of the eastern slope of the watershed. Downstream of the dam, the mainstem of the Coquitlam River has had the majority of its drainage patterns altered by logging and, more recently, development. A reasonably-intact riparian linear corridor exists along much of the Coquitlam River although this corridor becomes less intact as the river nears the central business district of Port Coquitlam.

In spite of the extensive impacts of urbanization on the river, the Coquitlam River supports 24 species of fish. There have, historically, been strong populations of Pacific salmon, trout, and char but these largely collapsed during the years of gravel mining from the river c.a. 1950’s- 1960’s. A number of initiatives have been undertaken over the last 30 years to restore these stocks. These initiatives include both off-channel habitat construction and improved flow regimes from the Coquitlam Reservoir and dam. As part of BC Hydro’s Coquitlam-Buntzen Water Use Plan (WUP) fish flows through the dam have been increased to facilitate fish production. Flows are regulated to balance trade-offs between power generation, drinking water, and fisheries values. As part of the WUP, fish production and fish habitat metrics have been monitored extensively by BC Hydro (McNair 2012; Schick et al. 2014).

Currently there are measurable abundances of coho salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), pink salmon (O. gorbuscha), chum salmon (O. keta), and steelhead trout (O. mykiss). Chinook salmon (O. tshawytscha) occur in low abundances but appear to be increasing (Schick et al. 2013). In addition to natural production of salmonids in the watershed, there are a number of fish hatcheries (Coquitlam River Hatchery, River Springs Hatchery, Hoy Creek Optimist Hatchery) that produce salmon and trout. Various off-channel habitat projects (Grant’s Tomb, Swoboda Channel, Grist Channel, Pitt River Rd. Compensation Ponds, etc.) also increase production in the lower watershed.

Other species of fish inhabiting Coquitlam River, downstream of the dam include longnose dace (Rhinichthys cataractae), prickly sculpin (Cottus asper), redside shiner (Richardsonius balteatus), Pacific lamprey (Entosphenus tridentatus), and three-spine stickleback (Gasterosteous aculeatus).

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 7

There have been numerous fish and fish habitat studies carried out by a variety of agencies (BC Ministry of Environment, Fisheries and Oceans Canada, BC Hydro, Metro Vancouver) on the lower Coquitlam River since the late 1970s. Most recently, assessments carried out through the WUP process have been the most comprehensive to date.

Because of the anthropogenic changes to the main channel and riparian areas of the mainstem Coquitlam River, a quantification of the habitat capacity is needed to undertake prescriptions to further restore the degraded aspects of this stream. One such model that inventories the habitat quality of streams is the Level 1 Fish Habitat Assessment Procedure. In 2014 the city of Coquitlam determine that such an assessment would be appropriate in order to maintain and enhance the viability of the community. Through the City of Coquitlam, and on behalf of a collaborative organization, the Coquitlam River Watershed Roundtable, the Pacific Salmon Foundation and Metro Vancouver provided grant funding to initiate a Level 1 Habitat Assessment for the lower Coquitlam River.

The project facilitator, InStream Fisheries Research Inc., was asked to:

- Provide a field-based Level 1 Fish Habitat Assessment Procedure (FHAP) survey on the Coquitlam River below the dam.

- Develop and conduct a Level 1 Fish Habitat Assessment classroom and field-training course for BCIT Fish, Wildlife and Recreation Program students and City of Coquitlam employees.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 8

2.0 Methods

2.1 Level 1 FHAP

The habitat assessment was prepared in accordance with guidelines developed in the Fish Habitat Assessment Procedures Manual (FHAP), Watershed Restoration Technical Circular 8 (Johnston and Slaney 1996). FHAP is a multi-stepped approach and the fish habitat assessment procedure evaluates and quantitatively assesses forested, salmonid bearing streams. The procedure also identifies fish species at risk, generates a quantitative description of fish habitat conditions, evaluates fish habitat conditions, and identifies opportunities for effective fish habitat rehabilitation within a watershed (Johnston and Slaney 1996).

The first step in the FHAP is to generate an overview summary of the existing fish-species information in the watershed of interest. BC Hydro has been carrying out adult and juvenile salmonid surveys in the lower Coquitlam River since 2000 (Schick et al. 2013) and this provided a baseline information set for this project. These studies have shown that coho, chum and pink salmon, and steelhead trout, escapements to the Coquitlam River have all been increasing to levels above that necessary to seed the available habitat. Chinook salmon escapements, while low, have been increasing since 2007.

Level 1 FHAP field survey was carried out in the late summer of 2013 on the Coquitlam River from its confluence with the Fraser River to the fish fence near Grant’s Tomb. This work took place over a total distance of 20.4 km of river. In order to stratify the sampling, the 20.4 km was divided into 5 reaches that largely reflect the rivers variations in channel morphology.

Reach-0, the most downstream reach, is located south of Pitt River Road and is highly influenced by tidal waters from the Fraser River. It is the lowest gradient of all of the study reaches and, unlike the other reaches has a stream-bed composition that is dominated by sand and silt. In contrast, Reach-4 is located near Coquitlam Dam and is the upper most reach comprising a high-gradient, coarse-sediment stream channel. Reach-2 was also divided into two sub-reaches in order to take into account to the respective-differing surrounding land uses. In short, Reach-2b is located alongside gravel mining operations while 2a is located within a more residential area. The five reaches vary in length, from the smallest at 1908 m to the largest at 4131 m. Although the Coquitlam River is highly constrained either naturally or due to development and diking, its riparian areas consist of a fairly vegetated riparian corridor. The river does pass under multiple road and pedestrian bridges but has avoided being culverted unlike many of its smaller tributaries. There are also numerous artificially constructed side channels and spawning channels along the river, especially upstream near the dam.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 9

Figure 1. Map of the lower Coquitlam River study area and its defined study reaches.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 10

The FHAP was undertaken as follows. Each reach was divided into hydraulic units that were categorized and separated into riffles, pools, cascades and glides. Physical measurements of bankfull width, wetted width, bankfull depth, mean wetted depth, maximum pool depth and residual pool depth where made with meter sticks, while gradient and unit length were made using multi-purpose rangefinder (accurate to 0.1 m).

The total amount of large woody debris (LWD) was counted within the bankfull width. To be counted, a piece of wood needs to exceed 2 m in length and 10 cm in diameter. Functional wood (within the wetted width), defined as that which influences channel geomorphology, was also counted. The functional LWD was further categorized into size classes of 10-20 cm diameter, 20-50 cm diameter, and >50 cm diameter. Within-reach large-wood numbers were then compared to diagnostics table values (Table 5, Johnston and Slaney 1996) and rated accordingly. In order for the reach to gain a rating of “good” salmonid habitat, a threshold of two pieces of LWD per bankfull width must be available. This threshold has been found to be accurate in streams where bankfull widths do not exceed 15 m. In smaller streams (<15 m bankfull) LWD on banks will influence channel hydraulics. However, in larger streams/rivers where bankfull widths are greater than 15 m, the LWD sitting high on the banks may have limited influence on channel hydraulics. Slaney and Andusak (2003) suggest that in larger streams/rivers functional LWD-per-bankfull width should be used as primary diagnostic for LWD. These criteria were used to evaluate LWD within the lower Coquitlam watershed.

Another diagnostic metric, calculated for each reach, was pool frequency or mean pool spacing per bankfull width. This was calculated by dividing total reach length by the number of pools within a reach multiplied by mean bankfull width. In the diagnostics table found in Johnston and Slaney (1996), a value of less than “2” is considered to be good salmonid habitat, but similar to LWD, this value is expected for streams of bankfull widths less than 15 m. In larger streams/rivers a value between 5-7 bankfull widths-between-pools was seen as close to the natural state of salmonid habitat (Montgomery et al. 1995; Myers and Swanson 1997). Diagnostics values for pool spacing were calculated based on the bankfull width of the stream in question.

Other parameters measured in the assessment included available cover, off-channel habitat, disturbance indicators, riparian vegetation, and substrate type and size. Off-channel habitat is important as it may serve as refuge or rearing areas for fish during times of high flows (Johnston and Slaney 1996) or overwintering habitat. It is important to note the accessibility of these channels to fish as isolated channels could be reconnected as a restoration project. However, for this study, we only assessed off-channel habitat located less than 5m from the mainstem perimeter.

GPS points were recorded at each end of the reaches. Upstream and downstream digital photographs were also taken of each unit as a record of location and a visual aid.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 11

3.0 Results

The Coquitlam River was divided into reaches based on a previous BC Hydro Instream Flow Needs (IFN) investigations (BC Hydro 2003). Beginning at the Fraser River (Reach-0), reaches were numbered in ascending order upstream to the fish fence by Grant’s Tomb (Reach-4). The reaches sampled ranged in length from 1908 m (Reach-3) to 4131 m (Reach-1). By using average stream-widths and unit lengths to calculate wetted area, the total wetted area sampled was 486,570 m2, with Reach-4 being the smallest at 32,450 m2 and Reach-0 the largest at 150,423 m2.

These habitat assessments were carried out from July 21st to August 29th, 2014.

3.1 Reach-0

Reach-0, the most downstream reach, extends upstream from the Fraser River to the uppermost extent of the tidally-influenced zone. It extended 4015 m upstream, ending just above the Hoy Creek confluence (Figure 1). Reach-0 had an average gradient of 0% and a mean bankfull width and wetted width of 34.4 m and 29.1 m, respectively (Table 1). The total wetted area was 150,423 m2. Reach-0 was composed of 2% (143 m) riffle, 13% (880 m) pool, and 85% (2993 m) glide (Table 2).

Pool frequency was low at 11.7 average-channel-widths between pools. Total LWD was the highest of all the reaches at 3.0 pieces per channel width, with functional LWD at 2.7 pieces per channel width (Table 1).

Fine substrates dominated the stream bottom in this reach (91%), with small gravel being the subdominant substrate (3% small gravel, 6% large gravel). Cover within the reach was provided primarily by overhanging vegetation (61%), and deep pools (24%).

Spawning habitat was found in 13% of the habitat units. Isolated spawning pockets were found in 3% of the units, while high quality spawning habitat was found for anadromous/resident species in 9% of the units. Disturbances were found in 38% of the units with eroded banks and pilings being most dominant.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 12

3.2 Reach-1

The longest unit, Reach-1, extends 4,130 m upstream from the uppermost extent of the tidally- influenced zone. Reach-1 was composed of 54% glide (2,242 m), 35% riffle (1458 m), and 10% pool (430 m) (Table 2). Mean bankfull width was 8.6 m and mean wetted width was 7.5 m. Total wetted area was 8,2607 m². There was a mean bankfull depth of 0.83 m and a mean gradient of 0.2% (Table 1).

Of the habitat units consisting of pools, Reach-1 had the overall best rating among all reaches when it came to mean pool spacing per channel width with a 15.2. This reach also possessed the most pieces of LWD, as well as pieces of functional LWD per channel width at 2.2 and 2.0 (Table 1).

In the units where cover was observed, overhanging vegetation was dominant (71%). The rest of the units were dominated by boulders (21%), deep-pools (5%), instream vegetation (1%), and cut-banks (1%). Where overhanging vegetation was dominant, it provided a mean percent cover of 4.6% (Figure 3).

The main substrates were cobbles at 48% (39% small cobble, 9% large cobble) with gravels at 33% (all large gravel), boulders at 13%, and sands, silts, clays or fine organic materials at 6% (Figure 5).

Spawning habitat was found in 44% of the units. Isolated spawning pockets for anadromous salmon was most common being found in 20% of the units. Isolated pockets were also found for resident species (2%) and anadromous/resident species (8%). Ten percent of sites with spawning habitat were considered to be of high quality for anadromous species (4%) and anadromous/resident species (6%) (Figure 7). Disturbances were found in 20% of the units with not one disturbance indicator being dominant (Table 3).

3.3 Reach-2a

Reach-2 was divided into two sub-reaches in order to take into account the surrounding land uses, with Reach-2a being located within a more urbanized area downstream of the gravel mining area located on the western side of the river valley. This reach extends 3,915 m upstream from Reach-1 having a gradient of 0.8%. Mean bankfull width and wetted width were 24.4 m and 21.6 m, respectively (Table 1). The total wetted area was 82,153 m2, which was composed of 70% (2,630 m) riffle and 30% (1,284 m) glide (Table 2).

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 13

No pool habitat was identified within in this reach. A total of 1.0 pieces of LWD per channel width was observed, while 0.6 pieces were functional LWD. The dominant substrates here were cobbles and boulders (2% small cobble, 53% large cobble, 43% boulders), and a small amount of large gravel was also present (2%).

Cover within the reach was provided mainly by overhanging vegetation (50%) and boulders (49%). Suitable spawning habitat was found in 39% of the 29 total habitat units.

Isolated spawning pockets were found for resident species (2%), anadromous species (20%), and both anadromous and resident species (8%). High quality spawning habitat was found for anadromous species (4%), and for both anadromous and resident species (6%). Few disturbances were found in this reach (8%), with no particular disturbance found to be dominant.

3.4 Reach-2b

Reach-2b is located parallel to extensive gravel mining operations along the west side of the valley. Approximately half way up the reach, Pritchett Creek drains into the river off of the eastern slope. In total, the reach was 4,055 m in length and had a gradient of 0.8% (Table 1). Mean bankfull width and wetted width were 26.9 m and 24.8 m, respectively. The total wetted area was 81,640 m2, and it was composed of 76% (3,045 m) riffle, 0.14% (11 m) pool, 0.73% (26 m) cascade, and 23% (974 m) glide.

Pool frequency was very low (poor rating) (Table 4), at 151 channel widths between pools. Total LWD was at 2.1 pieces per channel width, with functional LWD at 1.3 pieces per channel width.

Large cobble and boulders dominated the substrate within the reach (54% and 40%), with small cobble and large gravel being the subdominant substrate types (5% and 2%).

Fish cover within the reach was comprised primarily of overhanging vegetation (55%) and boulders (45%). Spawning habitat was found in 59% of the reach. Also, 2% were isolated spawning pockets, suitable for anadromous species, 2% were isolated spawning pockets suitable for resident species, and 49% were isolated spawning pockets suitable for both anadromous and resident species. A total of 6% was high quality spawning habitat for both anadromous and resident species.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 14

Disturbances were noted in 29% of the habitat units with elevated mid-channel bars being the most dominant.

3.5 Reach-3

Reach-3 extends from the upstream limit of the gravel mining area, a total of 1,908 m, to the Or Creek confluence, making it the shortest reach sampled in the river. Mean gradient for the reach was assessed at 1.3%.

Average bankfull width and wetted widths were 19.3 m and 18.6 m, respectively (Table 1). The total wetted area was 33,365 m2, with 62% (3,045 m) consisting of riffle, 3% (45.6 m) of pool, 13% (176 m) of cascade, and 23% (460 m) of glide (Table 2).

Pool frequency had a low (poor rating) (Table 4) at 49 average channel widths between pools. A total of 1.2 pieces of LWD was present per channel width, 1.0 pieces were functional LWD (Table 1). Boulders and large cobbles were the dominant substrate, at 46% and 43%, respectively. Small cobble was the subdominant substrate at 11%. The majority of the cover was composed of overhanging vegetation (46%) and boulders (46%) with the rest of the coverage provided by deep pools (4%) and large woody debris (4%).

Salmonid habitat suitable for spawning was found in 69% of the habitat units. Isolated spawning pockets suitable for resident species were in 20% of the units. Suitable substrate and flow for anadromous species were in 3% of the habitat units and spawning pockets suitable for both resident and anadromous species were in 46% of the habitat units. Disturbances were mainly comprised of elevated mid channel bars and un-vegetated bars; they accounted for 11% of the habitat units.

3.6 Reach-4

Reach-4 is located directly upstream from Reach-3, beginning at the confluence of Or Creek. It extends upstream for 2378 m towards the Coquitlam Dam at a gradient of 1% (Table 1).

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 15

The mean bankfull width and wetted width were 16.3 m and 15.2 m, respectively, with a total wetted area of 32,450 m2 (Table 1). This reach was composed of 62% (1,397 m) riffles, and 38% (977 m) glides.

No pool habitats were observed in this reach. Very little LWD was observed per channel width (0.9 total pieces, Table 1) with about 71% of the wood being functional LWD. The substrate morphology of Reach-4 is dominated by large boulders (55%) and large cobbles (33%). The rest of the substrates were small cobbles (8%) and sand/silt material (4%) distributed in low bars and planar bed sections (low bed load movement).

Cover within the reach was provided by boulders (56%) and overhanging vegetation (32%), the rest as large woody debris (12%).

Suitable spawning habitat was found in 49% of the units, where 8% were isolated pockets suitable for resident species, 6% were isolated pockets suitable for anadromous species, and 27% were isolated pockets suitable for both anadromous and resident species. A total of 8% were high-quality spawning habitat suitable for anadromous and resident species. Disturbances were found in 12% of the units, where elevated mid channel bars were the dominant disturbance.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 16

4.0 Discussion

The intention of this study was to assess the basic fish habitat availability in the mainstem of the Coquitlam River between the dam at Coquitlam Reservoir and the Fraser River. The lower Coquitlam River is a highly urbanized watershed with a legacy of anthropogenic impacts. Logging of the riparian areas preceded the land development. In recent years there has been a recognition that past practices have degraded fish habitat and fish production. The legacies of river impoundment, development and other industrial activities have created a flow-regulated river with degraded habitat. Recent enhancement initiatives have served to reverse some of these declines and fish populations, in particular salmonids, are gradually rebounding.

In order to restore streams degraded by human activities, we need to, first, understand the habitat capacity. The Level 1 FHAP survey “provides a standard framework for identifying the needs and opportunities for fish habitat restoration through systematic resource assessments, and for prescribing and implementing effective activities to improve fishery and aquatic resources.” (Johnson and Slaney 1996). The fish habitat assessment conducted in 2014 identified, in general, that the fish habitat condition in the surveyed reaches is poor (Table 4). Of particular concern is the lack of pools which are important holding areas for upstream migrating adult salmonids and important rearing areas for juveniles. Pool habitat can also provide cover. There is a limited amount of spawning gravel, especially in the lower reaches, and much of the suitable gravel has a high level of embeddedness.

Our survey found that there was a lack of cover available to fish from large instream woody debris throughout most of the river. LWD is almost always associated with complex fish habitat and refuge areas. The reduction in of flushing flows due to the dam and mature riparian forest suggests that LWD accumulations are unlikely to occur naturally. Most of the historical surveys have identified the reduced value of fish habitat (especially in the downstream reaches) resulting from a lack of LWD (Douglas 2007)

The primary aim of the baseline habitat survey is to identify habitat conditions in the surveyed reaches that may limit salmonid fish production (Johnson and Slaney 1996). This habitat assessment has identified some degraded habitat variables. Fish habitat could be improved through the implementation of reach specific restoration opportunities.

Broadly, the lower Coquitlam River is dominated by a riffle-glide channel type across all reaches excepting Reach-0 which is tidally influenced. In the upper reaches (primarily downstream of Or Creek) the channel is aggrading somewhat from tributary sediment inputs. Further downstream, however, the channel is stable or even degrading as is typical of dam headed rivers that have few natural upstream sediment inputs. These channel types can have moderate salmonid habitat value as compared to unimpacted systems.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 17

Our assessment showed that there are few or temporary barriers to adult salmonid migration. There are some log jam barriers found in Reach-4 that may act as barriers to migration at low flows but these are likely temporary log jams that are subject to movement during fall/winter storm events. Reach-3 has extensive man-made rock weirs in various locations that may also serve to impede fish migration at low flows.

A deficiency of high quality pool habitat was identified as a cause for concern in the habitat assessment. Pool habitat provides rearing and holding habitat for all life stages of salmonids. Only 3 out of the 6 reaches surveyed had measurable pool habitat and the largest areas occurred in Reach-0. This tidally influenced lower reach undoubtedly provides excellent holding and rearing habitat for salmonids in the Coquitlam. Generalized diagnostics of salmonid habitat suggest that greater than 30% pool area within a given reach is good condition (Johnson and Slaney 1996). No reaches in our survey exceeded 13% pool habitat by area.

Typically, coincident with pool habitat is large woody debris which often acts functionally to create the scour necessary to create a pool. LWD can serve as cover from predation for salmonids and reaches lacking in LWD subsequently have reduced habitat value. Most reaches do not lack in total amounts of LWD and are rated either good or fair. However, in order for LWD to be functional it must provide scour for the formation of a pool. The assessed ratings for functional LWD were low for all reaches excepting Reach-0.

The recruitment of wood into streams is a function of the characteristics of the riparian area. The overwhelming majority of riparian-stand structure was young forest across all the reaches of the Coquitlam River. This is not conducive to the development of good woody-debris structure in streams. This type of riparian vegetation is often associated with elevated stream temperatures, reduced bank stability and reduced LWD inputs to the river. These are all elements that can serve to diminish salmonid habitat quality. Somewhat balancing this off, the abundance of light input from diminished riparian cover can increase leaf litter, algal production, and ultimately food sources for fish.

Off-channel habitats provide important overwintering sites and refuge areas during high flow events. In the lower Coquitlam River historical industrial practices, channelization and urbanization have virtually eliminated off-channel areas. Natural off-channel habitat was limited in all reaches apart from Reach-4. There have been recent attempts over the last 25 years to increase salmonid habitat quality by opening up old side-streams or constructing artificial off- channel habitat in the lower river. Stream restoration and enhancement sites such as the Or Creek channels and ponds or the Grist Channel were attempts to increase salmonid habitat values by increasing off-channel habitat.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 18

These habitat surveys identified that in the reaches upstream of the Pitt River Bridge (Reaches 1-4) there were measurable suitable spawning gravel for anadromous and resident salmonids. It was apparent that most of the suitable areas of gravel were isolated but well distributed through the river. The accumulation of fines substrate materials (sand) downstream of Reach-4 may be contributing to the degradation of high quality salmonid habitat.

There have been a number of Coquitlam River fish habitat assessments conducted over the past 30 years. They have typically found similar results to those provided in this report. Previous studies have found that there was little cover available to fish in the mainstem of the river (De Leeuw 1982; Dewell et al. 1987; Riley et al. 1998).

The measurements of habitat condition show that important parameters related to salmonid habitat (LWD, pool habitat and off-channel habitat) are limited across most reaches and likely limit natural fish production. Yet fish surveys for some species show that the Coquitlam River carrying capacity is being exceeded in most cases relative to streams of comparable nutrient richness (Schick et al. 2013). It is important to recognize, however, that supplementation of natural production from hatcheries will mask the habitat limitations placed upon this river.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 19

Recommendations:

This report identifies that there are some extensive areas of the lower Coquitlam River with habitat impairment. The deficiencies identified in this report were arrived at by comparing current channel conditions with average habitat conditions for a watershed in an undisturbed area. The Coquitlam River has a legacy of habitat pressures that are unlikely to be reversed en masse. Nevertheless, a number of measures can be taken to assist in the recovery of this river. These include:

- Identify specific sites for Level 2 field assessments to provide the detailed information needed to develop appropriate habitat restoration plans. - Work with ongoing juvenile salmonid monitoring via the Coquitlam River Monitoring Program (BC Hydro) help identify critical habitats that are of particular importance to target species. - Exploring the potential for educational opportunities related to salmonid colonization in an urban environment. i.e. through BCIT, Streamkeepers groups, public involvement.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 20

5.0 Fish Wildlife and Recreation Program Training

An important component of the 2014 Coquitlam River fish habitat assessment was a collaborative training project between the Fish Wildlife and Recreation Program at the British Columbia Institute of Technology, the City of Coquitlam and Instream Fisheries Research Inc. The purpose of the program was to develop a classroom and field based training module for BCIT students and other interested parties.

Instream Fisheries Research developed a classroom presentation (Appendix D) that was delivered at BCIT on September 8, 2015. The overall purpose of the presentation was to give an introductory overview of the survey methodology outlined in WRP Technical Circular #8 Fish Habitat Assessment Procedure. Although not specific to the Coquitlam River, the training provided gave a good fundamental background for fish habitat surveys undertaken in British Columbia.

The second component of the BCIT training program was a field presentation carried out on a portion of Guichon Creek which runs through the BCIT campus. The qualified instructor from IFR showed students the basic concepts associated with collecting the various fish habitat parameters, gave an overview of proper data collection and field techniques.

On September 15th and 17th Instream Fisheries led a Coquitlam River training exercise for the habitat assessment students. The survey area was centered at the Reach 2A/2B break located at Galette Park (Figure 1). The students were split into two groups, one of which worked in a downstream direction into Reach 2A and the other moved upstream into Reach 2B. Students were split into small groups (3-4 persons) and each group would assess a discrete habitat unit, record their data and then move forward to the next available unsurveyed habitat unit. This “leapfrogging” technique allowed each group to encounter a variety of different habitat units over the two days of training. Several training staff moved among the survey groups to provide direction and answer questions when asked.

Over the two day period the students surveyed approximately 3.8 km of mainstem (primary) habitat in the Coquitlam River. This training program served to give the students a combination of classroom and real-world experience to serve as a baseline introduction to the process of salmonid habitat evaluation.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 21

6.0 References

De Leeuw, A.D. 1982. Enhancement possibilities for some anadromous salmonids in the Coquitlam River. Unpublished report. Fish and Wildlife Branch, BC. Ministry of Environment, Victoria, BC. Dewell, D., B. Saboe, D. Misky, and A. Arcand. 1987. A biophysical inventory of salmonid juveniles in the Coquitlam River and its tributaries. Unpublished report. Douglas, T. 2007. Lower Coquitlam River fish habitat and flooding assessment. Report prepared for Watershed Watch Salmon Society and Kwikwetlem First Nation. 88 p. Bisson, P. A., K. Sullivan, and J. L. Nielsen. 1998. Channel hydraulics, habitat use, and body form of juvenile coho salmon. Steelhead, and Cutthroat Trout in streams. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 117:3, 262-273. BC Hydro. 2003. Lower Coquitlam River 2003 instream flow needs assessment: interim report on transect data collection. Prepared for the BC Hydro Coquitlam Dam Water Use Plan project, Burnaby, BC. Johnston, N.T., and P.A. Slaney 1996. Fish habitat assessment procedures. Province of BC Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 8: 97 p. McNair, J. 2012. Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Requirements Study. COQMON-3. 2008 – 2011. Report prepared for B.C. Hydro Power Facilities, Burnaby, BC. January 2012. 13 p. Myers, T., and S. Swanson 1997. Variability of pool characteristics with pool type and formative feature on small Great Basin rangeland streams. Journal of Hydrology 201:62-81. Montgomery, D.R., J.M. Buffington, R.D. Smith, K.M. Schmidt, and G. Pess 1995. Pool spacing in forest channels. Water Resources Research 31:1097-1105. Schick, J., J. Macnair, and G. Lewis. 2013. Coquitlam River Fish Monitoring Program: 2000- 2013 Results. Report prepared for B.C. Hydro Power Facilities, Burnaby, BC. July 2014. 144 p. Schick, J., S. Decker, J. Macnair, and G. Lewis. 2013. Coquitlam River fish monitoring program: 2000-2011 results. Report prepared for B.C. Hydro Power Facilities, Burnaby, BC. April 2013. 148 p. Slaney, P.A., and H. Andusak 2003. Fish habitat assessment of the Lardeau River (2002) integrated with habitat assessments of the Duncan River. Contract report for the Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection. 37 p.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 22

TABLES

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 23

Table 1. Parameter statistics, by reach, for the Coquitlam River collected during summer 2014.

Reach

0 1 2A 2B 3 4

Reach length (m) 4,015.7 4,130.7 3,914.5 4,055.1 1,908.1 2,377.9

Total wetted area (m2) 150,422.9 106,539.5 82,152.5 81,640.1 33,364.5 32,450.4

Average gradient (%) 0.0 0.2 0.8 0.8 1.3 1.0

Average mainstem gradient 0.0 0.2 0.7 0.7 1.1 0.8 (%) Mean bankfull width (m) 34.4 27.2 24.2 26.9 19.3 16.3

Mean wetted width (m) 29.1 21.1 21.6 24.8 18.6 15.2

Mean water depth (m) 0.80 0.45 0.45 0.44 0.46 0.55

Mean bankfull depth (m) 1.79 0.83 0.70 0.64 0.65 0.72

Mean pool spacing per 11.7 15.2 0.0 150.7 49.4 0.0 channel width

Total number of LWD pieces 3.0 2.2 1.0 2.1 1.2 0.9 per channel width Number of functional LWD 2.7 2.0 0.6 1.3 1.0 0.6 pieces per channel width

Dominant substrate F SC/LG LC/B LC/B B/LC B/LC

Dominant cover 0 OV OV/B OV/B B/OV B

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 24

Table 2. Statistics for the various habitat types, by reach, for the Coquitlam River collected during summer 2014.

Reach

0 1 2A 2B 3 4

Length in Riffle 143.1 1,458.4 2,630.1 3,044.5 1,226.5 1,397.3 reach(m) Total Wetted 2,980.3 39,685.8 57,350.2 61,858.3 20,574.0 19,960.2 Area (m2) ↓ Reach amount (%) 2 37 70 76 62 62 of total area Length in Pool 879.7 429.9 - 10.8 45.6 - reach (m) Total Wetted 19,319.5 10,551.2 - 114.5 889.2 - Area (m2) ↓ Reach amount (%) 13 10 - 0 3 - of total area Length in Cascade - - 26.3 175.9 - reach(m) Total Wetted - - 599.6 4,218.9 - Area (m2) ↓ Reach amount (%) - - 1 13 - of total area Length in Glide 2,992.9 2,242.4 1,284.4 973.5 460.1 976.6 reach (m) Total Wetted 128,123.2 56,302.5 24,802.3 19,067.7 7,682.4 12,478.7 Area (m2) ↓ Reach amount (%) 85 53 30 23 23 38 of total area

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 25

Table 3. Disturbance indicators by reach for the lower Coquitlam River collected during November 2013. (EB=eroding banks, PD=most LWD parallel to banks, MC=multiple channels (braiding), MB=elevated mid-channel bars, DW=extensive areas of (unvegetated) bar, WG=large, extensive sediment wedges, and LJ/JM=recently formed log jams).

Reach # of units with disturbances % of units Type 0 12 38% PILINGS,EB,DW 1 13 20% DW,EB,JM,MB,MC,BC 2A 4 8% BC,MB,MC,JM 2B 18 29% MB,BC,MC,DW,EB,JM 3 4 11% MB,DW 4 6 12% MB,BC

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 26

Table 4. Coquitlam River diagnostics of salmonid habitat at the reach level, 2014. Note that off-channel habitat, located greater than 5 m from the main-stem perimeter, was not assessed.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 27

FIGURES

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 28

Figure 2. 2013 Mean daily discharge (m3/s) measured at Water Survey of Canada hydrometric station, 08MH002 Coquitlam River, at Port Coquitlam.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 29

Figure 3. Proportion of dominant cover types by reach in the Coquitlam River. (OV=overhanging vegetation, DP=deep pool, LWD=large woody debris, IV=instream vegetation, C=undercut banks, B=boulders

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 30

Figure 4. Mean percentage of cover type (± SD) by reach in the Coquitlam River. (C=undercut banks, IV=instream vegetation, DP=deep pool, LWD=large woody debris, B=boulders, OV=overhanging vegetation

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 31

Figure 5. Proportion of dominant bed material types by reach in the Coquitlam River. (R=bedrock, B=boulders, C=cobbles, G=gravels, F=fines

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 32

Figure 6. Detailed proportion of dominant bed material types by reach in the Coquitlam River. (R=bedrock, B=boulders, LC=large cobbles, SC=small cobbles, LG=large gravels, SG=small gravels, S=sands

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 33

Figure 7. Percent frequency of spawning gravels, by reach, in the Coquitlam River, summer 2014. (L=little suitable spawning gravels, H=extensive areas of spawning gravels; R=suitable for resident trout and char, A=suitable for anadromous salmon, AR=suitable for both resident trout and anadromous salmon

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 34

PHOTOGRAPHS

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 35

Photo A. Reach-0 pool habitat at UTM 10U 0514485 5454871 (looking downstream), July 21, 2014

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 36

Photo B. Reach-1 riffle habitat UTM 10U 0515401 516227 (looking downstream), July 30, 2014.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 37

Photo C. Reach-1 glide habitat UTM 10U 0515401 5457821 (looking downstream), July 30, 2014.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 38

Photo D. Reach-2a glide habitat UTM 10U 0516582 5459578 (looking downstream??), July 31, 2014. Note artificial LWD structures on left side of river

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 39

Photo E. Reach-2a glide habitat UTM 10U 0516519 5461510 (looking upstream), August 5, 2014. Note woody debris jam.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 40

Photo F. Reach-2a riffle habitat UTM 10U 0516900 5462550 (looking downstream), August 7, 2014.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 41

Photo G. Reach-3 cascade habitat UTM 10U 0516584 5463782 (looking upstream), August 11, 2014.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 42

Photo H. Reach-3 pool habitat UTM 10U 0516930 5464728 (looking upstream), August 11, 2014.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 43

Photo I. Reach-4 glide habitat UTM 10U 0516571 5466190 (looking upstream), August 28, 2014.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 44

Photo J. Reach-4 riffle habitat UTM 10U 0516473 5466738 (looking upstream) August 29, 2014.

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 45

Photo K. Student training in Reach-2A. September 17, 2014

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 46

APPENDIX A - Raw Data Collected by InStream Fisheries Research Inc. Mean Mean Mean Mean Bank Length Gradient Bank Water Bank Wetted Pool Depths (m) Pool Date Reach Unit # Type Cat. Depth (m) (%) Depth Depth Width Width Type (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Max Crest Residual 21-Jul-14 0 1 R 1 7.9 0.1 1.03 0.80 0.23 26.1 22.3 21-Jul-14 0 2 G 1 117.1 0.0 1.14 0.80 0.34 23.4 21.1 21-Jul-14 0 3 R 1 84.1 0.1 1.22 0.85 0.37 23.3 15.8 21-Jul-14 0 4 P 1 71.6 0.0 2.02 1.05 0.97 19.8 19.7 3.00 1.05 1.95 SC 21-Jul-14 0 5 G 1 60.5 0.0 1.66 1.00 0.66 23.8 19.4 21-Jul-14 0 6 P 1 30.1 0.0 2.01 1.00 1.01 26.7 21.7 1.85 0.70 1.15 SC 21-Jul-14 0 7 G 1 16.9 0.0 1.60 1.00 0.60 24.0 20.5 21-Jul-14 0 8 P 1 131.6 0.0 2.44 1.30 1.14 21.8 19.8 2.30 1.03 1.27 SC 21-Jul-14 0 9 G 1 46 0.0 1.46 0.80 0.66 23.8 22.6 21-Jul-14 0 10 P 1 121.1 0.0 1.92 0.90 1.02 27.6 22.2 2.65 0.78 1.67 SC 21-Jul-14 0 11 G 1 51.6 0.0 1.30 0.70 0.60 25.9 22.9 21-Jul-14 0 12 P 1 112.6 0.0 2.13 0.80 1.33 28.0 25.3 1.65 0.90 0.75 SC 21-Jul-14 0 13 G 1 146.5 0.0 1.93 0.73 1.21 27.6 25.1 21-Jul-14 0 14 P 1 77.8 0.0 2.37 0.62 1.75 24.5 23.3 2.60 1.30 1.30 SC 22-Jul-14 0 15 G 1 63.6 0.0 1.51 1.20 0.31 30.5 27.4 22-Jul-14 0 16 R 1 27.5 0.1 1.43 1.20 0.23 36.1 29.0 22-Jul-14 0 17 P 1 117.4 0.0 2.46 1.38 1.09 27.9 19.9 2.00 0.93 1.07 SC 22-Jul-14 0 18 G 1 159.4 0.0 1.70 1.20 0.50 33.6 26.0 22-Jul-14 0 19 R 1 23.6 0.2 2.15 1.30 0.85 36.3 28.9 22-Jul-14 0 20 G 1 104.6 0.0 1.76 1.25 0.51 32.2 26.7 22-Jul-14 0 21 P 3 (18) 10.0 1.65 0.50 1.15 SC 22-Jul-14 0 22 P 1 124.7 0.0 2.35 1.35 1.00 32.4 19.2 2.20 1.23 0.97 SC 22-Jul-14 0 23 G 1 124.3 0.0 1.85 1.20 0.65 33.6 30.2 22-Jul-14 0 24 G 1 230 0.0 1.81 1.25 0.56 45.6 21.0 22-Jul-14 0 25 G 1 172.3 0.0 2.15 1.25 0.90 35.2 25.2 22-Jul-14 0 26 G 1 183.2 0.0 1.88 1.20 0.68 43.6 39.7 22-Jul-14 0 27 G 1 157.6 0.0 1.70 1.20 0.50 45.5 43.2 22-Jul-14 0 28 G 1 129.3 0.0 1.82 1.20 0.62 47.1 35.2 22-Jul-14 0 29 P 1 92.8 0.0 2.73 1.20 1.53 34.9 27.8 2.10 1.00 1.10 SC

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 47

Mean Mean Mean Mean Bank Length Gradient Bank Water Bank Wetted Pool Depths (m) Pool Date Reach Unit # Type Cat. Depth (m) (%) Depth Depth Width Width Type (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Max Crest Residual 22-Jul-14 0 30 G 1 228.9 0.0 1.73 1.05 0.68 50.7 47.9 22-Jul-14 0 31 G 1 183.5 0.0 1.75 0.80 0.95 45.8 44.0 22-Jul-14 0 32 G 1 300 0.0 0.65 0.55 1.13 58.8 57.1 22-Jul-14 0 33 G 1 517.6 0.0 1.60 0.45 1.15 83.4 80.9 29-Jul-14 1 1 G 1 171.4 0.0 1.57 0.90 0.67 22.7 20.6 29-Jul-14 1 2 R 1 49.9 0.5 1.12 0.65 0.47 33.4 21.6 29-Jul-14 1 3 G 1 114.3 0.0 0.95 0.60 0.35 30.9 25.8 29-Jul-14 1 4 P 1 102.9 0.0 1.56 0.60 0.96 33.3 31.3 1.60 0.70 0.90 SC 29-Jul-14 1 5 G 1 53 0.0 1.32 0.60 0.72 24.4 23.4 29-Jul-14 1 6 P 1 50 0.0 1.73 0.60 1.13 22.5 20.0 1.50 80.00 0.70 SC 29-Jul-14 1 7 G 1 79.6 0.0 0.88 0.55 0.33 26.7 24.8 29-Jul-14 1 8 P 1 70.6 0.0 1.42 0.60 0.82 22.5 20.6 1.80 0.62 1.18 SC 29-Jul-14 1 9 R 1 48.8 0.1 1.12 0.60 0.52 30.9 17.8 29-Jul-14 1 10 G 1 76.1 0.0 1.08 0.55 0.53 25.0 21.8 29-Jul-14 1 11 P 3 34 8.0 1.40 0.60 0.80 SC 29-Jul-14 1 12 R 1 49.3 0.3 0.93 0.60 0.33 19.7 18.4 29-Jul-14 1 13 G 1 76.7 0.0 0.93 0.55 0.38 25.0 22.8 29-Jul-14 1 14 P 1 104.5 0.0 1.77 0.45 1.32 19.0 18.4 2.00 0.55 1.45 SC 29-Jul-14 1 15 G 1 38.5 0.0 0.68 0.45 0.23 26.5 24.5 29-Jul-14 1 16 R 1 49.4 0.4 0.84 0.50 0.34 26.0 18.4 29-Jul-14 1 17 P 3 18.6 7.0 1.15 0.30 0.85 SC 29-Jul-14 1 18 P 1 63.3 0.0 1.27 0.45 0.82 27.0 19.6 1.4 0.31 1.09 SC 29-Jul-14 1 19 R 1 19.4 0.3 0.66 0.45 0.21 26.8 22.8 29-Jul-14 1 20 G 1 50 0.0 0.89 0.50 0.39 21.5 21.5 29-Jul-14 1 21 R 1 46.3 0.1 0.64 0.40 0.24 24.4 24.4 29-Jul-14 1 22 G 1 23.7 0.0 0.84 0.45 0.39 22.7 21.7 29-Jul-14 1 23 P 1 29.1 0.0 1.42 0.45 0.97 22.7 21.7 2.00 0.55 1.45 SC 29-Jul-14 1 24 R 1 94.6 0.1 0.75 0.40 0.35 32.8 17.2 29-Jul-14 1 25 G 1 163.2 0.0 0.83 0.35 0.48 41.4 23.1 29-Jul-14 1 26 R 1 115.1 0.1 0.65 0.30 0.35 24.7 14.8 30-Jul-14 1 1 G 1 60.9 0.0 0.70 0.35 0.35 29.9 26.2

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 48

Mean Mean Mean Mean Bank Length Gradient Bank Water Bank Wetted Pool Depths (m) Pool Date Reach Unit # Type Cat. Depth (m) (%) Depth Depth Width Width Type (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Max Crest Residual 30-Jul-14 1 2 G 1 87.3 0.0 1.01 0.40 0.61 21.2 16.5 30-Jul-14 1 3 R 1 89.9 0.3 0.68 0.35 0.33 21.8 19.8 30-Jul-14 1 4 P 3 18.6 6.0 1.25 0.35 0.90 SC 30-Jul-14 1 5 R 2 33.2 0.2 0.71 0.40 0.31 7.6 7.1 30-Jul-14 1 6 P 2 9.5 0.0 1.18 0.40 0.78 6.8 6.2 1.15 0.23 0.92 SC 30-Jul-14 1 7 R 2 44.4 0.4 0.67 0.40 0.27 6.4 5.9 30-Jul-14 1 8 G 2 29 0.1 0.77 0.35 0.42 7.0 6.0 30-Jul-14 1 9 R 2 24.1 0.7 0.49 0.30 0.19 12.1 9.8 30-Jul-14 1 10 G 2 15.3 0.0 0.58 0.30 0.28 15.6 14.4 30-Jul-14 1 11 G 1 100.4 0.0 0.81 0.25 0.56 24.0 17.0 30-Jul-14 1 12 R 1 24.2 0.1 0.57 0.25 0.32 19.6 15.8 30-Jul-14 1 13 G 1 26.1 0.1 0.60 0.25 0.35 64.4 11.3 30-Jul-14 1 14 R 1 30 0.9 0.80 0.30 0.50 21.6 10.3 30-Jul-14 1 15 G 1 52.3 0.0 0.75 0.25 0.50 15.5 12.7 30-Jul-14 1 16 R 1 71.2 0.4 0.58 0.30 0.28 14.8 13.6 30-Jul-14 1 17 G 1 108 0.0 0.73 0.30 0.43 31.6 12.6 30-Jul-14 1 18 G 2 131.6 0.0 0.49 0.25 0.24 13.4 11.4 30-Jul-14 1 19 R 1 70 0.5 0.46 0.20 0.26 37.0 29.2 30-Jul-14 1 20 G 1 56.9 0.1 0.52 0.20 0.32 30.2 25.6 30-Jul-14 1 21 R 1 19.2 0.2 0.48 0.25 0.23 23.8 22.7 30-Jul-14 1 22 G 1 92.8 0.0 0.63 0.25 0.38 22.6 15.7 30-Jul-14 1 23 R 1 40.7 0.4 0.72 0.25 0.47 24.5 11.7 30-Jul-14 1 24 G 1 39.3 0.2 0.51 0.20 0.31 29.0 18.5 30-Jul-14 1 25 R 1 37.6 0.2 0.52 0.25 0.27 30.3 30.1 30-Jul-14 1 26 G 1 59.5 0.0 0.65 0.25 0.40 21.0 20.8 30-Jul-14 1 27 R 1 50.6 0.3 0.48 0.20 0.28 43.4 19.4 30-Jul-14 1 28 G 1 128.7 0.0 0.53 0.25 0.28 27.3 24.0 30-Jul-14 1 29 R 1 47 0.6 0.43 0.20 0.23 28.5 27.0 30-Jul-14 1 30 G 1 108.3 0.0 0.60 0.30 0.30 27.8 27.3 30-Jul-14 1 31 R 1 188 0.5 0.64 0.28 0.36 34.7 21.1 30-Jul-14 1 32 G 2 67.5 0.0 0.41 0.25 0.16 6.0 5.0

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 49

Mean Mean Mean Mean Bank Length Gradient Bank Water Bank Wetted Pool Depths (m) Pool Date Reach Unit # Type Cat. Depth (m) (%) Depth Depth Width Width Type (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Max Crest Residual 30-Jul-14 1 33 R 2 20.6 1.7 0.34 0.20 0.14 7.3 5.6 30-Jul-14 1 34 G 2 24.1 0.0 0.53 0.20 0.33 9.2 6.6 31-Jul-14 1 1 G 1 98.6 0.1 0.65 0.20 0.45 25.0 22.3 31-Jul-14 1 2 R 1 42.4 0.6 0.54 0.25 0.29 28.0 26.6 31-Jul-14 1 3 G 1 54.1 0.0 0.76 0.25 0.51 21.8 18.1 31-Jul-14 1 4 R 1 33.8 0.5 0.63 0.30 0.33 24.8 20.3 31-Jul-14 1 5 G 1 55.2 0.0 0.83 0.25 0.58 19.9 15.7 31-Jul-14 1 6 R 1 31.5 2.1 0.48 0.20 0.28 33.1 32.5 31-Jul-14 1 7 R 1 87.2 1.0 0.47 0.20 0.27 37.1 36.5 31-Jul-14 2A 8 G 1 68.8 0.0 0.56 0.20 0.36 31.3 29.8 31-Jul-14 2A 9 R 1 144.6 0.8 0.53 0.25 0.28 31.9 30.9 31-Jul-14 2A 10 G 1 44.2 0.1 0.74 0.30 0.44 21.0 19.4 31-Jul-14 2A 11 R 1 237.8 0.9 0.59 0.23 0.36 20.8 19.9 31-Jul-14 2A 12 G 1 40.6 0.0 0.84 0.30 0.54 20.5 14.3 31-Jul-14 2A 13 R 1 105.3 1.0 0.50 0.25 0.25 28.1 27.5 31-Jul-14 2A 14 G 1 110.3 0.0 0.81 0.30 0.51 22.6 21.7 31-Jul-14 2A 15 R 1 41.6 1.0 0.60 0.25 0.35 24.6 22.2 31-Jul-14 2A 16 G 1 142.7 0.0 0.80 0.33 0.48 16.6 15.6 31-Jul-14 2A 17 R 1 124.9 0.9 0.63 0.30 0.33 23.6 22.4 31-Jul-14 2A 18 G 1 38 0.0 0.67 0.25 0.42 17.3 17.0 31-Jul-14 2A 19 R 1 174.8 1.4 0.61 0.25 0.36 25.4 24.3 31-Jul-14 2A 20 G 1 79 0.0 0.95 0.25 0.70 22.3 20.9 31-Jul-14 2A 21 R 1 90.5 1.8 0.51 0.20 0.31 30.5 27.8 01-Aug-14 2A 1 G 1 91.3 0.0 0.78 0.25 0.53 20.1 19.6 01-Aug-14 2A 2 R 1 78.2 2.0 0.71 0.30 0.41 17.9 14.7 01-Aug-14 2A 3 R 1 135.2 1.2 0.53 0.25 0.28 34.3 32.0 01-Aug-14 2A 4 G 1 33.6 0.0 0.84 0.25 0.59 24.7 22.7 01-Aug-14 2A 5 R 1 95.5 0.7 0.74 0.30 0.44 21.4 20.7 01-Aug-14 2A 6 G 1 75 0.0 0.63 0.30 0.33 18.6 17.2 01-Aug-14 2A 7 R 1 99.8 1.8 0.74 0.30 0.44 34.7 27.5 01-Aug-14 2A 8 G 1 42.6 0.1 0.79 0.30 0.49 22.2 21.0

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 50

Mean Mean Mean Mean Bank Length Gradient Bank Water Bank Wetted Pool Depths (m) Pool Date Reach Unit # Type Cat. Depth (m) (%) Depth Depth Width Width Type (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Max Crest Residual 01-Aug-14 2A 9 R 1 109.2 1.6 0.72 0.28 0.45 26.3 22.4 01-Aug-14 2A 10 G 1 25.3 0.0 0.85 0.30 0.55 23.2 19.6 01-Aug-14 2A 11 R 1 333.1 1.2 0.68 0.25 0.43 23.6 20.0 01-Aug-14 2A 12 G 1 28.4 0.1 0.86 0.25 0.61 18.7 16.3 01-Aug-14 2A 13 R 1 93.5 0.6 0.75 0.30 0.45 18.8 13.0 05-Aug-14 2A 1 G 2 12.6 0.0 0.56 0.25 0.31 11.4 9.3 05-Aug-14 2A 2 R 2 15.5 1.8 0.40 0.20 0.20 10.8 10.1 05-Aug-14 2A 3 G 2 9.4 0.0 0.49 0.25 0.24 12.2 11.7 05-Aug-14 2A 4 R 2 14.3 0.8 0.37 0.20 0.17 14.2 14.1 05-Aug-14 2A 5 G 2 22.4 0.0 0.64 0.20 0.44 9.3 8.0 05-Aug-14 2A 6 R 2 8 3.7 0.53 0.20 0.33 9.6 7.2 05-Aug-14 2A 7 G 2 13.5 0.0 0.53 0.20 0.33 12.8 11.6 05-Aug-14 2A 8 R 2 15.4 2.3 0.42 0.20 0.22 9.3 7.3 05-Aug-14 2A 9 G 2 10.1 0.0 0.68 0.25 0.43 8.4 5.8 05-Aug-14 2A 10 R 2 30.3 2.8 0.41 0.15 0.26 10.2 8.7 05-Aug-14 2A 11 G 2 22.2 0.1 0.58 0.25 0.33 13.6 13.6 05-Aug-14 2A 12 R 2 37 0.8 0.53 0.20 0.33 13.9 12.7 05-Aug-14 2A 13 G 1 51.1 0.0 1.10 0.18 0.92 13.1 12.3 05-Aug-14 2A 14 R 1 177.6 1.1 0.52 0.20 0.32 26.2 19.3 05-Aug-14 2A 15 G 1 134.3 0.0 0.87 0.25 0.62 23.9 22.7 05-Aug-14 2A 16 R 1 161.8 1.4 0.63 0.25 0.38 25.3 23.4 05-Aug-14 2A 17 G 1 56.3 0.0 0.82 0.25 0.57 23.8 22.8 05-Aug-14 2A 18 R 1 173.7 2.0 0.64 0.23 0.42 18.8 16.2 05-Aug-14 2A 19 R 1 29.4 1.9 0.50 0.20 0.30 38.1 34.7 05-Aug-14 2A 20 R 2 70.6 2.1 0.44 0.20 0.24 22.8 22.0 05-Aug-14 2A 21 G 2 12.5 0.0 0.70 0.20 0.50 12.0 12.0 05-Aug-14 2A 22 R 2 32.5 1.4 0.46 0.20 0.26 12.7 12.3 05-Aug-14 2A 23 G 2 24 0.0 0.84 0.20 0.64 12.0 11.3 05-Aug-14 2A 24 G 1 96.2 0.0 0.67 0.23 0.44 25.4 25.1 05-Aug-14 2B 25 R 1 131.4 1.6 0.63 0.25 0.38 14.3 13.5 05-Aug-14 2B 26 G 1 24.4 0.2 0.85 0.20 0.65 20.9 17.3

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 51

Mean Mean Mean Mean Bank Length Gradient Bank Water Bank Wetted Pool Depths (m) Pool Date Reach Unit # Type Cat. Depth (m) (%) Depth Depth Width Width Type (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Max Crest Residual 05-Aug-14 2B 27 R 1 65.5 1.9 0.50 0.20 0.30 33.9 33.3 05-Aug-14 2B 28 G 1 33.4 0.0 0.68 0.20 0.48 23.9 21.3 05-Aug-14 2B 29 R 1 82.1 0.9 0.52 0.25 0.27 22.9 20.0 05-Aug-14 2B 30 R 2 168.3 2.1 0.43 0.15 0.28 14.6 14.0 05-Aug-14 2B 31 G 2 30.1 0.0 0.45 0.15 0.30 12.1 11.6 05-Aug-14 2B 32 R 2 85.7 2.5 0.46 0.15 0.31 15.0 15.0 05-Aug-14 2B 33 G 2 14.3 0.0 0.66 0.20 0.46 16.7 13.4 05-Aug-14 2B 34 R 2 22.3 1.4 0.47 0.15 0.32 13.9 13.6 05-Aug-14 2B 35 R 2 42.7 2.3 0.45 0.15 0.30 3.8 3.6 07-Aug-14 2B 1 G 1 135.3 0.0 0.54 0.20 0.34 33.1 26.1 07-Aug-14 2B 2 R 1 89.3 0.8 0.56 0.20 0.36 31.1 29.9 07-Aug-14 2B 3 R 1 156.4 0.9 0.50 0.20 0.30 35.8 35.3 07-Aug-14 2B 4 R 1 118.7 0.9 0.72 0.20 0.52 17.3 16.4 07-Aug-14 2B 5 R 2 52.2 1.4 0.29 0.15 0.14 12.3 8.6 07-Aug-14 2B 6 G 2 38.7 0.1 0.29 0.15 0.14 12.4 11.2 07-Aug-14 2B 7 P 2 10.8 0.0 0.92 0.25 0.67 10.6 10.6 121 25 94 SC 07-Aug-14 2B 8 R 2 29 0.8 0.36 0.25 0.11 10.2 6.0 07-Aug-14 2B 9 G 2 41.4 0.0 0.54 0.25 0.29 10.4 6.4 07-Aug-14 2B 10 R 2 29.9 1.4 0.70 0.35 0.35 4.0 3.2 07-Aug-14 2B 11 G 1 68.7 0.0 0.83 0.25 0.58 24.9 24.7 07-Aug-14 2B 12 R 1 89.5 1.2 0.84 0.25 0.59 18.2 16.1 07-Aug-14 2B 13 G 1 29.2 0.1 0.66 0.20 0.46 23.4 22.2 07-Aug-14 2B 14 R 1 125.9 1.0 0.50 0.20 0.30 32.6 29.0 07-Aug-14 2B 15 G 1 99.9 0.0 0.59 0.20 0.39 25.0 24.2 07-Aug-14 2B 16 G 2 29 0.0 0.40 0.20 0.20 4.0 4.0 07-Aug-14 2B 17 R 2 53.7 0.5 0.39 0.20 0.19 9.8 9.8 07-Aug-14 2B 18 R 1 88.5 1.1 0.55 0.20 0.35 36.3 33.7 07-Aug-14 2B 19 R 1 18.6 1.1 0.51 0.20 0.31 38.0 37.2 07-Aug-14 2B 20 G 1 39.8 0.1 0.60 0.20 0.40 38.4 36.3 07-Aug-14 2B 21 R 1 47.7 1.9 0.59 0.20 0.39 40.0 39.7 07-Aug-14 2B 22 R 1 85.8 0.6 0.45 0.45 36.0 35.4

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 52

Mean Mean Mean Mean Bank Length Gradient Bank Water Bank Wetted Pool Depths (m) Pool Date Reach Unit # Type Cat. Depth (m) (%) Depth Depth Width Width Type (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Max Crest Residual 08-Aug-14 2B 1 G 1 24 0.0 0.67 0.20 0.47 25.8 24.5 08-Aug-14 2B 2 R 1 57.7 0.6 0.61 0.20 0.41 26.2 24.7 08-Aug-14 2B 3 G 1 45 0.1 0.72 0.20 0.52 21.8 19.1 08-Aug-14 2B 4 R 1 268 0.9 0.58 0.20 0.38 21.3 20.6 08-Aug-14 2B 5 G 1 22.7 0.1 0.59 0.20 0.39 25.5 24.8 08-Aug-14 2B 6 R 1 110.6 1.0 0.49 0.20 0.29 27.8 25.6 08-Aug-14 2B 7 G 1 18 0.0 0.69 0.20 0.49 36.4 35.5 08-Aug-14 2B 8 R 1 98.3 1.1 0.50 0.20 0.30 26.8 23.8 08-Aug-14 2B 9 R 1 35 0.2 0.49 0.15 0.34 25.6 25.2 08-Aug-14 2B 10 G 1 62.9 0.1 0.72 0.20 0.52 26.6 18.5 08-Aug-14 2B 11 R 2 109.4 1.2 0.05 0.00 0.05 3.5 1.8 08-Aug-14 2B 12 R 1 124.2 0.9 0.81 0.25 0.56 17.8 16.5 08-Aug-14 2B 13 C 1 26.3 4.7 0.54 0.25 0.29 25.8 22.8 08-Aug-14 2B 14 R 1 212.3 0.7 0.56 0.15 0.41 26.2 20.9 08-Aug-14 2B 15 R 2 61.6 1.0 8.50 0.20 8.30 6.0 4.5 08-Aug-14 2B 16 G 1 44.8 0.0 0.63 0.15 0.48 23.7 20.9 08-Aug-14 2B 17 R 1 145 1.1 1.24 0.25 0.99 14.1 13.4 08-Aug-14 2B 18 G 1 41.8 0.0 0.97 0.25 0.72 21.8 19.9 08-Aug-14 2B 19 R 2 14 2.8 0.40 0.25 0.15 16.2 10.0 08-Aug-14 2B 20 G 2 28.4 0.2 0.66 0.20 0.46 9.0 7.4 08-Aug-14 2B 21 R 2 12.6 2.7 0.37 0.20 0.17 8.4 6.4 08-Aug-14 2B 22 G 2 13.5 0.1 0.48 0.20 0.28 8.4 6.4 08-Aug-14 2B 23 R 2 18.9 1.9 0.29 0.15 0.14 8.4 7.3 08-Aug-14 2B 24 G 2 16 0.0 0.54 0.20 0.34 7.7 7.2 08-Aug-14 2B 25 R 2 24.9 1.9 0.37 0.20 0.17 9.0 6.0 08-Aug-14 2B 26 G 2 44.7 0.0 0.80 0.20 0.60 8.0 7.2 11-Aug-14 2B 1 R 1 47.7 0.3 0.54 0.20 0.34 34.7 32.7 11-Aug-14 2B 2 G 1 8.7 0.0 0.75 0.20 0.55 27.0 23.0 11-Aug-14 2B 3 R 1 121.1 1.3 0.57 0.20 0.37 29.0 26.0 11-Aug-14 2B 4 G 1 18.8 0.0 0.78 0.20 0.58 19.9 17.3 11-Aug-14 3 5 G 1 42.9 0.0 0.61 0.20 0.41 20.0 20.0

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 53

Mean Mean Mean Mean Bank Length Gradient Bank Water Bank Wetted Pool Depths (m) Pool Date Reach Unit # Type Cat. Depth (m) (%) Depth Depth Width Width Type (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Max Crest Residual 11-Aug-14 3 6 R 1 113.5 1.2 0.50 0.20 0.30 21.1 19.5 11-Aug-14 3 7 G 1 34.6 0.0 0.67 0.20 0.47 22.0 21.8 11-Aug-14 3 8 R 1 125.2 1.6 0.64 0.15 0.49 24.0 23.8 11-Aug-14 3 9 G 1 49.7 0.0 0.62 0.20 0.42 21.5 21.3 11-Aug-14 3 10 R 1 98.7 0.8 0.60 0.20 0.40 22.8 18.6 11-Aug-14 3 11 P 1 45.6 0.0 1.31 0.25 1.06 20.2 19.5 11-Aug-14 3 12 C 1 25.9 3.7 0.79 0.20 0.59 22.5 19.0 >1.70 0.35 >1.35 SC 11-Aug-14 3 13 R 1 30.6 0.6 0.66 0.20 0.46 15.6 14.7 11-Aug-14 3 14 C 1 69.1 3.8 0.57 0.20 0.37 22.5 32.5 11-Aug-14 3 15 G 1 34.7 0.0 0.61 0.20 0.41 22.5 21.4 11-Aug-14 3 16 R 1 52.5 2.5 0.58 0.20 0.38 23.3 19.6 11-Aug-14 3 17 C 1 68 4.4 0.74 0.20 0.54 22.7 20.3 11-Aug-14 3 18 R 1 50.3 0.9 0.65 0.20 0.45 22.7 22.6 11-Aug-14 3 19 G 1 39.1 0.0 0.67 0.20 0.47 20.0 18.9 11-Aug-14 3 20 R 1 63.8 3.3 0.53 0.15 0.38 27.2 25.8 11-Aug-14 3 21 P 3 7.6 5.5 1.21 0.35 0.86 SC 11-Aug-14 3 22 G 2 19.1 0.0 0.41 0.20 0.21 9.8 7.7 11-Aug-14 3 23 R 2 43.1 1.9 0.38 0.20 0.18 9.4 7.3 11-Aug-14 3 24 G 2 24.5 0.1 0.43 0.20 0.23 7.0 6.0 11-Aug-14 3 25 R 2 40.3 2.5 0.64 0.15 0.49 11.2 8.8 11-Aug-14 3 26 C 2 12.9 9.3 0.59 0.20 0.39 8.2 7.8 11-Aug-14 3 27 G 2 17.4 0.1 0.87 0.25 0.62 11.2 9.2 103 53 0.5 SC 11-Aug-14 3 28 R 2 122.2 1.3 0.45 0.20 0.25 8.7 8.1 11-Aug-14 3 29 G 1 27.2 0.0 0.68 0.20 0.48 30.6 25.7 12-Aug-14 3 1 R 1 61.9 1.2 0.45 0.15 0.30 30.0 25.9 12-Aug-14 3 2 G 1 29.5 0.2 0.71 0.20 0.51 18.1 17.0 12-Aug-14 3 3 R 1 92.9 1.2 0.58 0.20 0.38 21.0 19.5 12-Aug-14 3 4 G 1 50.7 0.1 0.65 0.20 0.45 18.6 16.9 12-Aug-14 3 5 R 1 63.2 1.2 0.84 0.20 0.64 13.2 11.9 12-Aug-14 3 6 R 1 106.5 0.9 0.56 0.20 0.36 23.8 23.1 12-Aug-14 3 7 G 1 70.7 0.0 1.03 0.20 0.83 12.1 12.0

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 54

Mean Mean Mean Mean Bank Length Gradient Bank Water Bank Wetted Pool Depths (m) Pool Date Reach Unit # Type Cat. Depth (m) (%) Depth Depth Width Width Type (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Max Crest Residual 12-Aug-14 3 8 R 1 44.4 0.3 0.87 0.25 0.62 9.4 8.2 12-Aug-14 3 9 R 1 44.5 1.9 0.29 0.10 0.19 7.9 7.1 12-Aug-14 3 10 G 1 20 0.0 0.40 0.15 0.25 9.0 8.5 12-Aug-14 3 11 R 1 72.9 0.9 0.41 0.15 0.26 5.5 4.5 28-Aug-14 4 1 R 1 26.2 3.5 0.58 0.20 0.38 26.1 24.6 28-Aug-14 4 2 G 1 54.6 0.3 0.72 0.20 0.52 23.3 16.2 28-Aug-14 4 3 R 1 36.1 1.9 0.55 0.20 0.35 19.3 16.8 28-Aug-14 4 4 G 2 7.7 2.6 0.35 0.25 0.10 3.7 2.4 28-Aug-14 4 5 R 2 8.7 0.0 0.39 0.20 0.19 3.7 2.9 28-Aug-14 4 6 O 2 4 7.0 3.7 2.9 28-Aug-14 4 7 G 2 4.9 0.3 0.41 0.20 0.21 3.7 3.3 28-Aug-14 4 8 R 2 17.7 0.4 0.36 0.20 0.16 5.4 4.8 28-Aug-14 4 9 G 2 16.2 0.0 0.26 0.15 0.11 7.5 4.4 28-Aug-14 4 10 R 2 20.2 0.7 0.25 0.15 0.10 9.2 8.2 28-Aug-14 4 11 G 1 18.4 0.3 0.92 0.20 0.72 11.5 10.3 28-Aug-14 4 12 R 1 170.6 0.9 0.64 0.20 0.44 18.2 14.7 28-Aug-14 4 13 R 2 22.3 2.3 0.48 0.20 0.28 4.5 3.6 28-Aug-14 4 14 G 2 11.2 0.1 0.44 0.15 0.29 5.7 4.9 28-Aug-14 4 15 R 2 12.8 1.0 0.42 0.15 0.27 7.6 6.3 28-Aug-14 4 16 G 2 17.5 0.0 0.44 0.15 0.29 8.8 8.6 28-Aug-14 4 17 G 1 29.2 0.3 0.89 0.20 0.69 12.5 12.0 28-Aug-14 4 18 R 1 77.9 1.6 0.77 0.20 0.57 17.8 16.6 28-Aug-14 4 19 G 1 42 0.0 0.95 0.20 0.75 9.1 8.6 28-Aug-14 4 20 R 1 18.4 0.9 0.64 0.20 0.44 10.1 10.1 28-Aug-14 4 21 G 1 83.5 0.0 0.82 0.20 0.62 16.8 16.8 28-Aug-14 4 22 R 1 95.7 2.3 0.83 0.20 0.63 15.8 15.3 28-Aug-14 4 23 G 1 61.6 0.4 0.84 0.20 0.64 21.6 20.5 28-Aug-14 4 24 R 1 142.2 1.3 0.82 0.20 0.62 15.7 15.5 28-Aug-14 4 25 G 1 58.2 0.4 0.62 0.15 0.47 16.3 16.1 28-Aug-14 4 26 R 1 49.7 1.0 0.77 0.15 0.62 15.3 14.2 28-Aug-14 4 27 R 2 41.3 1.4 0.45 0.20 0.25 5.5 5.3

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 55

Mean Mean Mean Mean Bank Length Gradient Bank Water Bank Wetted Pool Depths (m) Pool Date Reach Unit # Type Cat. Depth (m) (%) Depth Depth Width Width Type (m) (m) (m) (m) (m) Max Crest Residual 28-Aug-14 4 28 G 2 56.6 0.1 0.59 0.15 0.44 5.6 4.9 28-Aug-14 4 29 R 1 54.7 0.9 0.63 0.15 0.48 27.8 23.8 28-Aug-14 4 30 G 1 66 0.4 0.75 0.15 0.60 21.0 20.2 28-Aug-14 4 31 R 1 90.5 0.9 0.76 0.20 0.56 23.1 24.6 28-Aug-14 4 32 G 1 59.5 0.3 0.80 0.20 0.60 16.4 15.3 29-Aug-14 4 1 R 1 93.4 0.6 0.53 0.15 0.38 16.6 15.6 29-Aug-14 4 2 G 1 23.1 0.4 0.57 0.15 0.42 20.8 20.3 29-Aug-14 4 3 R 1 67.2 0.7 0.68 0.15 0.53 11.0 10.7 29-Aug-14 4 4 G 1 115.7 0.1 1.11 0.15 0.96 16.2 13.9 29-Aug-14 4 5 R 1 68.5 1.7 0.64 0.15 0.49 8.3 8.1 29-Aug-14 4 6 G 1 35.9 0.3 0.76 0.15 0.61 8.1 7.9 29-Aug-14 4 7 R 2 22.2 2.9 0.32 0.15 0.17 7.1 6.1 29-Aug-14 4 8 G 2 23.4 0.1 0.47 0.15 0.32 7.3 7.1 29-Aug-14 4 9 R 2 10.5 2.8 0.32 0.15 0.17 7.4 7.0 29-Aug-14 4 10 R 1 54.4 1.4 0.50 0.15 0.35 11.8 11.2 29-Aug-14 4 11 G 1 48.4 0.1 0.67 0.15 0.52 13.8 13.6 29-Aug-14 4 12 R 1 109.9 0.6 0.44 0.10 0.34 12.8 12.8 29-Aug-14 4 13 G 2 24.3 0.0 0.71 0.20 0.51 6.7 6.0 29-Aug-14 4 14 R 2 9.5 0.9 0.73 0.20 0.53 4.8 4.6 29-Aug-14 4 15 G 2 67.5 0.1 0.53 0.15 0.38 7.2 7.1 29-Aug-14 4 16 G 2 51.2 0.0 0.61 0.10 0.51 9.1 8.8 29-Aug-14 4 17 R 2 76.7 1.0 0.27 0.10 0.17 15.6 15.3

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 56

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach D-90 # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 21-Jul-14 0 1 LG SG AR-H 1 1 OV 4 21-Jul-14 0 2 F LG 9 OV 15 LWD TR 21-Jul-14 0 3 LG SG AR-H 27 21 6 OV TR LWD 2 21-Jul-14 0 4 F SG R-L 14 1 7 4 DP 40 LWD 5 UC 20 21-Jul-14 0 5 F SG 4 2 OV TR 21-Jul-14 0 6 F SG 3 1 2 OV 3 LWD 10 DP 40 21-Jul-14 0 7 F SG 3 1 2 OV 5 21-Jul-14 0 8 F SG 19 9 4 OV 3 DP 40 21-Jul-14 0 9 F SG 3 1 1 OV 5 21-Jul-14 0 10 F 16 3 4 8 OV 3 DP 40 21-Jul-14 0 11 F SG 14 2 12 OV 4 21-Jul-14 0 12 F SG 10 6 3 1 OV 6 DP 20 21-Jul-14 0 13 F LG 10 3 6 1 OV 3 21-Jul-14 0 14 F 2 2 OV 3 DP 25 22-Jul-14 0 15 F SG 4 3 1 OV 4 22-Jul-14 0 16 SG F AR-H 7 3 4 OV TR 22-Jul-14 0 17 F 11 8 1 2 OV 5 DP 20 22-Jul-14 0 18 F SG 4 2 2 OV 5 22-Jul-14 0 19 F SG 6 5 1 OV 4 22-Jul-14 0 20 F SG 20 13 4 3 OV 2 22-Jul-14 0 21 22-Jul-14 0 22 F 22 10 10 2 DP 30 22-Jul-14 0 23 F 6 4 1 1 OV TR 22-Jul-14 0 24 F SG 36 10 13 5 IV 5 OV TR 22-Jul-14 0 25 F 14 7 1 5 OV 4 22-Jul-14 0 26 F 27 10 9 7 OV TR 22-Jul-14 0 27 F 14 8 5 1 22-Jul-14 0 28 F 2 1 1 22-Jul-14 0 29 F DP 20 22-Jul-14 0 30 F 4 1 3 22-Jul-14 0 31 F 15 3 7 5 22-Jul-14 0 32 F 15 5 8 2 22-Jul-14 0 33 F 5 2 1 1

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 57

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach D-90 # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 29-Jul-14 1 1 LG F 9 5 4 OV 4 29-Jul-14 1 2 LG SG AR-L 9 8 1 OV 5 C TR IV TR 29-Jul-14 1 3 LG F 11 7 2 2 OV 4 29-Jul-14 1 4 F LG 38 12 11 5 OV 5 DP 30 29-Jul-14 1 5 LG F 7 2 4 1 OV TR 29-Jul-14 1 6 F 5 3 2 OV 3 DP 15 29-Jul-14 1 7 LG F AR-H 16 10 5 1 OV 3 29-Jul-14 1 8 F 11 7 1 OV 2 DP 20 29-Jul-14 1 9 LG SC A-H 8 5 3 1 OV 2 29-Jul-14 1 10 LG SC 10 6 3 1 OV 2 29-Jul-14 1 11 (F) SC (DP) 29-Jul-14 1 12 SC LG A-H 3 3 OV 3 29-Jul-14 1 13 LG 6 3 1 2 OV 3 29-Jul-14 1 14 F LG 3 2 1 OV 3 29-Jul-14 1 15 SC LG A-L 8 6 2 OV 4 29-Jul-14 1 16 SC LG AR-H 5 2 2 1 OV 3 29-Jul-14 1 17 (F) LG (DP) 10 29-Jul-14 1 18 LG F 9 5 1 1 OV 3 29-Jul-14 1 19 SC LG AR-H 4 2 1 1 OV 5 29-Jul-14 1 20 LG SG 5 3 2 C 3 29-Jul-14 1 21 LG SC A-H 8 6 2 OV 4 29-Jul-14 1 22 LG SC 4 2 1 1 OV 5 29-Jul-14 1 23 LG SC 3 2 1 OV 3 29-Jul-14 1 24 LG SC AR-H 15 5 8 1 OV 5 29-Jul-14 1 25 SC LG AR-H 14 8 5 1 OV TR 29-Jul-14 1 26 SC LG AR-H 17 7 7 OV 2 30-Jul-14 1 1 SC LG A-L 4 4 OV 3 30-Jul-14 1 2 SC LG 10 6 2 2 OV TR B TR 30-Jul-14 1 3 SC LG AR-H 18 9 8 1 OV 3 30-Jul-14 1 4 (F) LG (LWD) 5 (DP) 30 30-Jul-14 1 5 SC LG 6 2 3 OV 70 30-Jul-14 1 6 SC LG 10 5 5 OV 70 DP 5 30-Jul-14 1 7 SC LG AR-H 6 2 1 OV 70

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 58

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach D-90 # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 30-Jul-14 1 8 SC LG AR-H 7 3 2 OV 50 30-Jul-14 1 9 SC LG AR-H 2 1 OV 10 30-Jul-14 1 10 SC LG A-L 3 2 1 OV TR 30-Jul-14 1 11 SC LG A-L 15 6 5 3 OV 3 30-Jul-14 1 12 SC LG A-L 5 2 2 1 30-Jul-14 1 13 SC LC 2 1 30-Jul-14 1 14 LG SC A-L 5 1 4 30-Jul-14 1 15 SC LG 3 3 B TR OV 5 30-Jul-14 1 16 SC LG 6 1 2 3 OV 8 B TR 30-Jul-14 1 17 LG SC 30-Jul-14 1 18 LG SC 12 9 3 B TR OV 10 30-Jul-14 1 19 LG SC A-L 9 5 4 OV 5 30-Jul-14 1 20 SC LG 4 3 1 OV 4 30-Jul-14 1 21 SC LG A-L 1 1 OV 3 30-Jul-14 1 22 LG LC A-L OV 3 30-Jul-14 1 23 LC SC A-L 3 2 1 OV 5 30-Jul-14 1 24 SC LC A-L 3 2 1 30-Jul-14 1 25 LG SC AR-H 2 1 1 OV 4 30-Jul-14 1 26 SC LC 4 3 30-Jul-14 1 27 SC LC A-L 2 2 B TR OV 5 30-Jul-14 1 28 LG SC 5 2 2 1 OV 8 B TR C TR 30-Jul-14 1 29 LC SC A-L 5 2 2 B TR OV 5 30-Jul-14 1 30 LC SC 3 2 1 OV 5 B TR 30-Jul-14 1 31 LC B 10 5 4 OV 3 B TR 30-Jul-14 1 32 B 20 10 + L J OV TR 30-Jul-14 1 33 B LC 4 3 30-Jul-14 1 34 B LC 3 1 1 B TR 31-Jul-14 1 1 LC B 1 1 B 2 31-Jul-14 1 2 B LC B 3 31-Jul-14 1 3 LC B 1 OV 3 31-Jul-14 1 4 B LC 1 1 B 4 OV 3 31-Jul-14 1 5 B LC 2 1 2 OV 2 B TR 31-Jul-14 1 6 B LC 3 OV 6 B 4

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 59

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach D-90 # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 31-Jul-14 1 7 B LC 6 3 1 OV 2 B 2 31-Jul-14 2A 8 LC LG 2 2 OV 4 B TR 31-Jul-14 2A 9 LC B 6 3 2 B 3 OV 2 31-Jul-14 2A 10 B LG 1 B 2 OV 5 31-Jul-14 2A 11 B LC 2 2 B 5 OV 2 31-Jul-14 2A 12 LC LG 2 1 OV 2 B TR 31-Jul-14 2A 13 LC B A-L 7 5 2 OV 2 B 3 31-Jul-14 2A 14 LC SC A-L 3 2 1 OV TR B TR 31-Jul-14 2A 15 LC B A-L 5 1 OV 5 B 2 31-Jul-14 2A 16 LC B A-L 23 2 14 B 3 OV TR 31-Jul-14 2A 17 LC B A-L 2 2 OV 2 B 2 31-Jul-14 2A 18 B LC OV TR B 3 31-Jul-14 2A 19 B LC 2 1 1 OV 3 B 2 31-Jul-14 2A 20 SC LG AR-L 1 OV 2 B TR 31-Jul-14 2A 21 B LC 6 1 B 3 01-Aug-14 2A 1 LC SC OV 4 B TR 01-Aug-14 2A 2 B LC 1 OV 3 B 3 01-Aug-14 2A 3 B LC A-L 5 2 1 OV TR B 3 01-Aug-14 2A 4 B LC OV TR B 2 01-Aug-14 2A 5 B LC A-L 3 1 OV TR B 4 01-Aug-14 2A 6 LC SC A-H OV 3 B TR 01-Aug-14 2A 7 B LC 7 2 2 B 5 01-Aug-14 2A 8 B LC OV TR B TR 01-Aug-14 2A 9 B LC A-L 2 1 OV 3 B 5 01-Aug-14 2A 10 B OV 2 B TR 01-Aug-14 2A 11 B A-L 10 3 1 1 B 7 OV 2 01-Aug-14 2A 12 LC B 32 37 40 1 OV TR 01-Aug-14 2A 13 B LC 35 30 35 2 OV 3 05-Aug-14 2A 1 LC F 05-Aug-14 2A 2 LG SC A-H 31 30 24 B TR 05-Aug-14 2A 3 LC SC 05-Aug-14 2A 4 LC SC 21 24 22 1 OV 10 05-Aug-14 2A 5 LC SC 26 27 27 OV TR

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 60

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach D-90 # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 05-Aug-14 2A 6 LC B 26 31 31 OV 5 B 3 05-Aug-14 2A 7 LC LG AR-L 36 31 29 4 4 B TR 05-Aug-14 2A 8 LC SC 28 30 36 1 1 OV TR B TR 05-Aug-14 2A 9 LC B 34 30 29 1 1 OV 10 B TR 05-Aug-14 2A 10 B LC 30 31 30 15 2 JL LWD 15 05-Aug-14 2A 11 LC SC 26 34 32 1 1 OV 3 05-Aug-14 2A 12 B LC 4 1 1 B 4 OV TR 05-Aug-14 2A 13 LC B OV TR 05-Aug-14 2A 14 LC B 11 2 4 OV 10 B 4 05-Aug-14 2A 15 LC LG AR-H 2 2 OV TR B 3 05-Aug-14 2A 16 LC B A-L 4 2 OV 2 05-Aug-14 2A 17 LC LG AR-L 2 1 1 B TR OV TR 05-Aug-14 2A 18 B LC 1 B 8 05-Aug-14 2A 19 LC SC AR-H 1 1 OV 3 B TR 05-Aug-14 2A 20 B LC AR-L 15 4 1 2 B 5 OV 5 05-Aug-14 2A 21 B OV 2 B 10 05-Aug-14 2A 22 B R-L 14 2 1 1 B 4 OV 3 05-Aug-14 2A 23 B F 14 1 L J B TR 05-Aug-14 2A 24 LC SC AR-H 2 2 OV 4 B TR 05-Aug-14 2B 25 B LC 12 L J, 1 1 OV TR B 5 05-Aug-14 2B 26 LC B AR-L 1 1 OV TR B TR 05-Aug-14 2B 27 B LC AR-L 5 4 B 5 OV TR 05-Aug-14 2B 28 LC B 2 2 OV TR 05-Aug-14 2B 29 B LC 5 2 2 1 B 2 OV 2 05-Aug-14 2B 30 LC B AR-L 10 5 1 1 B 5 OV 4 05-Aug-14 2B 31 SC LC 2 2 05-Aug-14 2B 32 B 5 3 1 05-Aug-14 2B 33 LC B 05-Aug-14 2B 34 B LC B 3 05-Aug-14 2B 35 B LC 2 1 1 OV 8 B TR 07-Aug-14 2B 1 LC SC AR-L 1 1 OV 2 07-Aug-14 2B 2 LC B AR-L 07-Aug-14 2B 3 B LC AR-L 1 1 OV TR

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 61

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach D-90 # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 07-Aug-14 2B 4 B LC B 3 OV TR 07-Aug-14 2B 5 B LC 5 2 3 07-Aug-14 2B 6 B LC 1 1 07-Aug-14 2B 7 B LC 12 JL 1 1 OV 3 LWD 8 07-Aug-14 2B 8 B LC OV 10 B 3 07-Aug-14 2B 9 LC SC 4 2 2 OV 5 B 4 07-Aug-14 2B 10 B LC 1 1 07-Aug-14 2B 11 LC B A-L B TR 07-Aug-14 2B 12 B LC 5 3 B 3 OV TR 07-Aug-14 2B 13 LC B AR-L 3 07-Aug-14 2B 14 LC B 2 1 OV 3 07-Aug-14 2B 15 LC SC AR-L OV 2 07-Aug-14 2B 16 LC SC AR-L 1 1 OV 40 07-Aug-14 2B 17 LC SC AR-L 21 5 5 OV 3 07-Aug-14 2B 18 B LC 1 B 5 OV TR 07-Aug-14 2B 19 LC B 3 1 1 OV 2 B 2 07-Aug-14 2B 20 LC SC AR-L 7 4 1 OV TR 07-Aug-14 2B 21 B LC AR-L 37 12 12 3 B 5 OV 3 07-Aug-14 2B 22 B LC AR-L 19 3 11 2 B 3 OV TR 08-Aug-14 2B 1 B LC AR-L B 3 08-Aug-14 2B 2 B LC 2 1 1 B 4 08-Aug-14 2B 3 LC B 2 B 3 OV TR 08-Aug-14 2B 4 B LC AR-L 17 8 2 OV 2 B 5 08-Aug-14 2B 5 LG SC AR-H 08-Aug-14 2B 6 LC B AR-L 14 6 2 OV TR B 2 08-Aug-14 2B 7 B LC AR-L 7 2 2 B 3 OV TR 08-Aug-14 2B 8 LC B AR-L 21 3 1 OV 2 B 3 08-Aug-14 2B 9 LC SC AR-H 3 1 OV 2 08-Aug-14 2B 10 LC SC AR-H 3 2 OV TR 08-Aug-14 2B 11 SC LG 2 OV 2 08-Aug-14 2B 12 LC B 5 2 B 3 08-Aug-14 2B 13 B R-L 3 2 B 3 08-Aug-14 2B 14 LC B AR-H 11 5 1 B 4 OV 3

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 62

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach D-90 # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 08-Aug-14 2B 15 LC B 18 5 1 OV 5 B 3 LWD TR 08-Aug-14 2B 16 LC SC AR-L OV TR 08-Aug-14 2B 17 LC SC AR-L 23 2 3 2 OV 5 B 3 08-Aug-14 2B 18 LC AR-L OV 2 08-Aug-14 2B 19 SC LC AR-L 3 1 2 OV 4 08-Aug-14 2B 20 LC B AR-L 4 1 1 2 B TR OV 5 08-Aug-14 2B 21 LC B AR-L 5 2 OV 4 B 3 08-Aug-14 2B 22 LC SC AR-L 3 1 2 08-Aug-14 2B 23 LC B 3 2 1 08-Aug-14 2B 24 LC SC AR-L 1 1 08-Aug-14 2B 25 LC B AR-L 2 1 08-Aug-14 2B 26 LC SC AR-L 4 1 2 OV 3 11-Aug-14 2B 1 B LC AR-L 1 1 B TR OV 2 11-Aug-14 2B 2 B LC 3 2 1 B TR 11-Aug-14 2B 3 B LC AR-L 6 3 1 OV 3 B TR 11-Aug-14 2B 4 LC B AR-L 2 2 B TR 11-Aug-14 3 5 LC B AR-L 2 1 OV 4 11-Aug-14 3 6 B LC AR-L 3 3 OV 4 B TR 11-Aug-14 3 7 LC B AR-L B TR 11-Aug-14 3 8 B LC AR-L 1 OV 3 B 5 11-Aug-14 3 9 LC SC AR-L OV 3 B TR 11-Aug-14 3 10 B LC AR-L 4 3 1 OV TR B TR 11-Aug-14 3 11 SC LG AR-L OV TR DP 8 B TR 11-Aug-14 3 12 B LC B 5 OV 3 11-Aug-14 3 13 B LC 11-Aug-14 3 14 B LC AR-L 1 B 5 11-Aug-14 3 15 B LC AR-L 3 2 1 OV TR B 2 11-Aug-14 3 16 B LC R-L 7 2 1 2 OV 5 B 3 11-Aug-14 3 17 B 7 2 2 1 B 5 11-Aug-14 3 18 LC B R-L 1 B 3 OV 3 11-Aug-14 3 19 LC B AR-L B 3 OV TR 11-Aug-14 3 20 B 1 OV TR B 2 DP 3 11-Aug-14 3 21 (B) (LC) (DP) 30 (B) 3

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 63

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach D-90 # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 11-Aug-14 3 22 LC SC AR-L 2 1 1 11-Aug-14 3 23 SC LC AR-L 1 1 11-Aug-14 3 24 B LC 12 L J 1 11-Aug-14 3 25 B LC B 10 OV 5 11-Aug-14 3 26 B 5 2 B 12 11-Aug-14 3 27 B SC R-L 1 1 B 5 11-Aug-14 3 28 LC SC 19 12 2 2 B 5 OV 3 11-Aug-14 3 29 LC B B TR OV TR 12-Aug-14 3 1 LC B R-L 4 3 1 B 4 OV 2 12-Aug-14 3 2 LC SC R-L 4 OV 2 12-Aug-14 3 3 B LC R-L OV 3 B 3 12-Aug-14 3 4 LC SC AR-L 1 1 12-Aug-14 3 5 LC B 10 8 2 OV TR LWD 3 12-Aug-14 3 6 LC B AR-L 10 4 6 OV TR LWD 2 12-Aug-14 3 7 LC B AR-L 10 7 3 12-Aug-14 3 8 B LC 3 2 B TR OV TR 12-Aug-14 3 9 SC LC R-H 5 2 2 1 OV 10 12-Aug-14 3 10 SC LC R-L 12-Aug-14 3 11 LC B AR-L 7 2 OV 10 B 5 28-Aug-14 4 1 B LC 2 1 B 5 28-Aug-14 4 2 B LC OV 2 28-Aug-14 4 3 B LC 3 2 OV 2 B TR 28-Aug-14 4 4 LC SC OV TR 28-Aug-14 4 5 F B 28-Aug-14 4 6 F 10 L J LWD 95 28-Aug-14 4 7 B F 28-Aug-14 4 8 B LC 1 1 B 3 28-Aug-14 4 9 LC B 28-Aug-14 4 10 B LC 3 2 1 B TR 28-Aug-14 4 11 B LC 1 28-Aug-14 4 12 B LC AR-L 7 2 1 1 OV 3 B TR 28-Aug-14 4 13 LC B B 4 OV 3 28-Aug-14 4 14 B LC B 3

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 64

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach D-90 # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 28-Aug-14 4 15 B LC B 2 28-Aug-14 4 16 LC B R-L B 2 28-Aug-14 4 17 LC B R-L OV TR B 2 28-Aug-14 4 18 B LC 3 1 1 B 3 OV TR 28-Aug-14 4 19 B LC 1 28-Aug-14 4 20 LC B A-L 1 1 B TR OV 3 28-Aug-14 4 21 LC SC AR-L 5 1 OV TR B TR 28-Aug-14 4 22 B LC 1 B 4 28-Aug-14 4 23 B LC AR-L 3 3 B 3 28-Aug-14 4 24 B 1 B 4 28-Aug-14 4 25 LC B AR-L 17 5 L J 1 LWD 3 28-Aug-14 4 26 B LC AR-L 3 2 B 2 28-Aug-14 4 27 B LC R-L 2 1 1 B 4 28-Aug-14 4 28 LC B R-L 1 1 B TR 28-Aug-14 4 29 B LC AR-L 20 5, L J 2 LWD TR 28-Aug-14 4 30 LC SC AR-L 14 5 2 2 B TR 28-Aug-14 4 31 B LC AR-L 3 B 3 28-Aug-14 4 32 B LC AR-L OV 3 B 3 29-Aug-14 4 1 B LC AR-L 1 OV 3 B 4 29-Aug-14 4 2 LC B AR-L 4 3 LWD 2 B 2 29-Aug-14 4 3 LC B AR-L OV 2 29-Aug-14 4 4 LC B AR-L 2 2 OV 4 29-Aug-14 4 5 B LC 2 B 5 29-Aug-14 4 6 LC B B TR 29-Aug-14 4 7 B LC B 8 OV 2 29-Aug-14 4 8 LC B A-L 29-Aug-14 4 9 B LC B 5 29-Aug-14 4 10 B LC B 2 29-Aug-14 4 11 LC B OV 2 29-Aug-14 4 12 B LC A-L 4 3 OV TR B 3 29-Aug-14 4 13 SC LG AR-H 5 1 LWD TR 29-Aug-14 4 14 B LC B TR 29-Aug-14 4 15 SC LG AR-H 2 1 1 LWD TR

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 65

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach D-90 # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 29-Aug-14 4 16 SC LG AR-H 4 2 2 OV TR LWD 2 29-Aug-14 4 17 SC LG AR-H 8 5 B TR OV TR

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Area Camera # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m²) Type Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 21-Jul-14 0 1 SC GOOD 16.2 2 EB 18.9 D YF 1 2241 2240 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 2 EB 100 D YF 2 2243 2242 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 3 EB 70 D YF 1 2245 2244 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 4 EB 71.6 D YF 1 2247 2246 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 5 D YF 1 2249 2248 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 6 PILINGS 15 D YF 1 2251 2250 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 7 PILINGS 1 D YF 1 2252 2251 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 8 PILINGS 120 D YF 1 2254/55 2253 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 9 D YF 1 2258 2257 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 10 D YF 1 2260 2259 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 11 EB 50 D YF 1 2262 2261 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 12 SC POOR <20 D YF 2 2265 2263 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 13 PILINGS 60 D YF 1 2267 2266 FUJI 21-Jul-14 0 14 PILINGS 10 D YF 1 2269 2268 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 15 D YF 1 2271 2270 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 16 D YF 1 2273 2272 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 17 D YF 1 2275 2274 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 18 D YF 1 2277 2276 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 19 D YF 1 2279 2278 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 20 D YF 1 2281 2280 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 21 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 22 D YF 1 2283 2282 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 23 SC GOOD 23 5 D YF 1 2285 2284 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 24 DW 227 S SHR 1 2287 2286 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 25 S SHR 1 2289 2288 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 26 S SHR 1 2291 2290 FUJI

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 66

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Area Camera # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m²) Type Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 22-Jul-14 0 27 S SHR 1 2293 2292 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 28 SC GOOD 32.7 8 S SHR 1 2294 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 29 S SHR 1 2296 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 30 S SHR 1 2298 2297 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 31 S SHR 1 2300 2299 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 32 SC GOOD <50 2 S SHR 1 2302 2301 FUJI 22-Jul-14 0 33 PILINGS 10 D YF 1 2303 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 1 EB 80 D YF 1 2306 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 2 EB 40 DW 50 D YF 1 2307 2309 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 3 D YF 1 2308 2310 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 4 D YF 1 2311 2312 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 5 D YF 1 2313 2314 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 6 JM 32 D YF 1 2315 2317 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 7 D YF 1 2318 2319 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 8 D YF 1 2320 2321/22 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 9 DW 15 D YF 1 2323 2324 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 10 D YF 1 2325 2326 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 11 (D) (YF) (1) FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 12 SC GOOD 38.4 3 D YF 1 2327 2329 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 13 D YF 1 2330 2331 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 14 D YF 1 2332 2333 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 15 D YF 1 2334 2335 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 16 DW 25 D YF 1 2336 2338 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 17 (D) (YF) (1) 2337 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 18 SC GOOD 27 D YF 1 2339 2341 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 19 D YF 1 2342 2343 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 20 D YF 1 2344 2345 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 21 D YF 1 2346 2347 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 22 D YF 1 2348 2349 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 23 D YF 1 2350 2351 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 24 SC GOOD 23 3 DW 90 D YF 1 2352 2353 FUJI 29-Jul-14 1 25 D YF 1 2354 2355 FUJI

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 67

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Area Camera # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m²) Type Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 29-Jul-14 1 26 MB 100 D YF 1 2356 2357 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 1 D YF 1 2358 2359 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 2 D YF 1 2360 2361 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 3 MC BC 28.2 JM D YF 1 2362 2364 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 4 (D) (YF) (1) 2363 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 5 D YF 4 2365 2366 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 6 D YF 4 2367 2368 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 7 D YF 4 2369 2370 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 8 JM D YF 3 2371 2372 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 9 D YF 1 2373 2374 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 10 SC GOOD 12 2 D YF 1 2375 2376 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 11 SC GOOD 17.2 2.5 D YF 1 2377 2378 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 12 D YF 1 2379 2380 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 13 D YF 1 2381 2382 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 14 MC MB 40 D YF 1 2383 2384 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 15 JM D YF 1 2385 2386 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 16 D YF 1 2387 2388 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 17 D YF 1 2389 2392 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 18 D YF 1 2390 2391 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 19 MB D YF 1 2393 2394 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 20 D YF 1 2395 2396 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 21 D YF 1 2397 2398 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 22 D YF 1 2399 2400 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 23 D YF 1 2401 2402 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 24 D YF 1 2403 2404 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 25 D YF 2 2405 2406 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 26 D YF 2 2407 2408 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 27 D YF 1 2409 2410 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 28 D YF 1 2411 2413 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 29 D YF 1 2414 2415 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 30 D YF 1 2416 2417 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 31 D YF 1 2418 & 20 2419 & 21 FUJI

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 68

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Area Camera # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m²) Type Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 30-Jul-14 1 32 D YF 4 2422 2423 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 33 D YF 4 2424 2425 FUJI 30-Jul-14 1 34 D YF 3 2426 2427 FUJI 31-Jul-14 1 1 D YF 1 2429 2430 FUJI 31-Jul-14 1 2 D YF 1 2431 2432 FUJI 31-Jul-14 1 3 EB 15 D YF 1 2433 2434 FUJI 31-Jul-14 1 4 D YF 1 2435 2436 FUJI 31-Jul-14 1 5 D YF 1 2437 2438 FUJI 31-Jul-14 1 6 D YF 1 2439 2440 FUJI 31-Jul-14 1 7 D YF 1 2441 2442 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 8 TRIB 1.50 D YF 1 2443 2444 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 9 D YF 1 2445 2446 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 10 D YF 2 2447 2448 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 11 D YF 2 2449 & 51 2450 & 52 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 12 TRIB 1.00 D YF 2 2453 2454 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 13 D YF 1 2455 2456 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 14 D YF 1 2457 2458 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 15 D YF 2 2459 2460 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 16 D YF 2 2461 2462 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 17 TRIB 0.75 D YF 2 2463 2464 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 18 D YF 4 2465 2466 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 19 D YF 1 2467 2468 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 20 D YF 1 2469 & 71 2470 & 72 FUJI 31-Jul-14 2A 21 D YF 1 2473 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 1 TRIB 2 D YF 1 2480 2481 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 2 D YF 1 2482 2483 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 3 MB 50 MC 135 D YF 1 2484 & 85 2486 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 4 D YF 1 2487 2488 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 5 TRIB GOOD TRICKLE D YF 1 2489 2490 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 6 D YF 2 2491 2492 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 7 TRIB GOOD 2 D YF 1 2493 2494 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 8 D YF 1 2495 2496 FUJI

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 69

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Area Camera # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m²) Type Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 01-Aug-14 2A 9 D YF 1 2497 2498 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 10 D YF 1 2499 2500 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 11 BC 100 IV 30 D YF 1 2501 2502 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 12 D YF 1 2503 2504 FUJI 01-Aug-14 2A 13 D YF 1 2505 2506 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 1 D YF 4 2507 2508 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 2 D YF 4 2509 2510 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 3 D YF 4 2511 2514 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 4 D YF 4 2515 2512 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 5 D YF 2 2513 2516 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 6 D YF 4 2517 2518 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 7 D YF 1 2519 2520 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 8 D YF 1 2521 2522 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 9 D YF 4 2523 2524 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 10 SC GOOD >70 2 D YF 3 2525 2526 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 11 D YF 2 2527 2528 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 12 D YF 1 2529 2530 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 13 D YF 2 2531 2532 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 14 D YF 2 2533 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 15 D YF 1 2534 2535 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 16 D YF 1 2536 2537 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 17 D YF 1 2538 2539 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 18 BC D YF 2 2540 2542 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 19 D YF 1 2543 2544 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 20 D YF 2 2546 2545 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 21 D YF 2 2548 2547 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 22 D YF 2 2550 2549 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 23 JM D YF 4 2552 2551 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2A 24 D YF 1 2553 2554 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2B 25 D YF 1 2555 2556 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2B 26 D YF 1 2557 2558 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2B 27 D YF 1 2559 2560 FUJI

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 70

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Area Camera # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m²) Type Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 05-Aug-14 2B 28 MB D YF 1 2561 2562 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2B 29 MB 29 D YF 1 2563 2564 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2B 30 D YF 4 2565 2566 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2B 31 D YF 4 2567 2568 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2B 32 SC GOOD 1.2 MC D YF 2 2569 2570 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2B 33 D YF 2 2571 2572 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2B 34 D YF 4 2573 2574 FUJI 05-Aug-14 2B 35 D YF 5 2575 2576 & 77 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 1 MC 35.5 M YF 1 2578 2579 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 2 M YF 1 2580 2581 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 3 MB 149.4 D YF 2 2582 2583 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 4 M YF 1 2584 2597 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 5 M YF 3 2585 2586 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 6 M YF 1 2587 2588 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 7 M YF 1 2589 2590 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 8 M YF 3 2591 2592 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 9 M YF 2 2593 2594 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 10 EB 29.9 M YF 2 2595 2596 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 11 M YF 1 2598 2599 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 12 TRIB POOR 25 0.7 M YF 1 2600 2601 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 13 M YF 1 2602 2603 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 14 MB 70 M YF 1 2604 2605 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 15 D YF 1 2606 2608 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 16 D YF 4 2607 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 17 TRIB POOR 1 D YF 3 2609 2610 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 18 D YF 1 2611 2612 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 19 MB D YF 1 2613 2614 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 20 MB D YF 1 2615 2616 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 21 TRIB POOR 1 MB D YF 1 2617 2618 FUJI 07-Aug-14 2B 22 MC M YF 1 2619 2620 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 1 M YF 1 2621 2622 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 2 M YF 1 2623 2624 FUJI

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 71

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Area Camera # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m²) Type Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 08-Aug-14 2B 3 M YF 1 2625 2626 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 4 TRIB GOOD 6 M YF 2 2627 2628 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 5 M YF 2 2629 2630 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 6 MB 30 M YF 2 2631 2632 & 34 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 7 JM MB 18 M YF 2 2633 & 35 2636 & 37 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 8 MC MB 22 M YF 1 2638 2640 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 9 M YF 1 2641 2642 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 10 M YF 1 2643 2645 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 11 M YF 3 2644 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 12 TRIB GOOD 4.5 M YF 1 2646 2647 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 13 M YF 1 2648 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 14 MB 41 M YF 1 2648 2650/51 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 15 SC GOOD D YF 3 2649 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 16 D YF 2 2652 2653 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 17 M YF 3 2654 2655 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 18 M YF 1 2673 2672 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 19 M YF 1 2657 2656 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 20 M YF 1 2659 2658 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 21 D YF 2 2661 2660 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 22 M YF 2 2663 2662 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 23 D YF 2 2665 2664 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 24 D YF 2 2667 2666 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 25 D YF 1 2669 2668 FUJI 08-Aug-14 2B 26 M YF 2 2671 2670 FUJI 11-Aug-14 2B 1 MB 45 M YF 2 2674 2675 FUJI 11-Aug-14 2B 2 MB 5 M YF 2 2676 2677 FUJI 11-Aug-14 2B 3 DW 25 MB 50 MC M YF 2 2678 2679 FUJI 11-Aug-14 2B 4 M YF 1 2680 2681 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 5 TRIB GOOD 2.5 M YF 2 2682 2683 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 6 MB M YF 2 2684 2685 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 7 M YF 1 2686 2687 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 8 M YF 1 2688 2689 FUJI

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 72

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Area Camera # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m²) Type Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 11-Aug-14 3 9 M YF 1 2690 2691 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 10 DW 35 M YF 1 2692 2693 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 11 M YF 1 2694 2695 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 12 M YF 1 2696 2697 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 13 M YF 1 2698 2699 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 14 M YF 1 2700 2701 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 15 M YF 1 2702 2703 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 16 TRIB GOOD 6 MB 26 M YF 1 2704 2705 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 17 M YF 1 2706 2707 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 18 M YF 1 2708 2709 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 19 M YF 2 2710 2711 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 20 M YF 1 2712 2714 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 21 M YF 2 2713 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 22 M YF 3 2716 2715 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 23 M YF 3 2718 & 19 2717 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 24 M YF 3 2721 2720 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 25 M YF 3 2723 2722 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 26 M YF 3 2725 2724 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 27 D YF 2 2727 2726 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 28 M YF 2 2729 & 30 2728 FUJI 11-Aug-14 3 29 D YF 1 2731 2732 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 1 MB 60 M YF 1 2733 2734 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 2 M YF 1 2735 2736 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 3 TRIB GOOD 0.75 D YF 1 2737 2738 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 4 M YF 1 2739 2741 & 40 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 5 M YF 1 2742 2743 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 6 M YF 1 2744 2745 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 7 D YF 1 2746 2747 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 8 M YF 2 2748 2755 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 9 D YF 2 2749 2750 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 10 D YF 1 2751 2752 FUJI 12-Aug-14 3 11 D YF 4 2753 2754 FUJI

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 73

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Area Camera # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m²) Type Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 28-Aug-14 4 1 M YF 1 2756 2757 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 2 M YF 1 2758 2759 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 3 M YF 1 2760 2774 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 4 D YF 3 2762 2761 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 5 TRIB GOOD 0.25 D YF 2 2764 2763 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 6 D YF 3 2767 2765 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 7 D YF 3 2767 2766 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 8 D YF 3 2769 2768 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 9 M YF 3 2771 2770 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 10 M YF 2 2773 2772 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 11 M YF 1 2775 2776 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 12 M YF 1 2777 2785 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 13 M YF 2 2778 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 14 M YF 2 2780 2779 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 15 M YF 2 2782 2781 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 16 M YF 2 2784 2783 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 17 M YF 1 2786 2787 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 18 M YF 2 2788 2789 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 19 D YF 1 2790 2791 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 20 MB 2 D YF 1 2792 2793 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 21 MB 12 D YF 2 2794 2795 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 22 M YF 2 2796 2797 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 23 MB 38 D YF 2 2798 2799 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 24 D YF 2 2800 2801 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 25 D YF 2 2802 2803 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 26 D YF 2 2804 2805 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 27 D YF 2 2807 2806 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 28 D YF 2 2809 2808 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 29 MB D YF 1 2811 2810 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 30 D YF 1 2813 2812 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 31 M YF 1 2814 2815 FUJI 28-Aug-14 4 32 M YF 1 2816 2817 FUJI

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 74

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Area Camera # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m²) Type Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 29-Aug-14 4 1 M YF 2 2818 2819 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 2 TRIB GOOD 200+ 4 MB 7 M YF 2 2820 2821 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 3 M YF 2 2822 2823 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 4 TRIB GOOD 200+ 4 M YF 2 2824 2885 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 5 M YF 3 2826 2833 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 6 M YF 2 2834 2835 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 7 M YF 3 2828 2827 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 8 M YF 3 2830 2829 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 9 M YF 3 2832 2831 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 10 D YF 2 2836 2837 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 11 TRIB GOOD 200+ 4.6 D YF 2 2838 2839 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 12 D YF 2 2840 2841 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 13 M YF 2 2843 2842 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 14 M YF 2 2845 2844 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 15 M YF 2 2847 2846 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 16 SL GOOD 20 10 D YF 1 2849 2848 FUJI 29-Aug-14 4 17 SL GOOD 20 4.3 BC 20 D YF 1 2851 & 53 2850 % 52 FUJI

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 75

Survey Discharge Unit #s Date Watershed Stream Start UTM End UTM Direction (m3/s) Weather Crew Reach Surveyed Coquitlam 10U 0514808 10U 0514378 21-Jul-14 Coquitlam River 5455361 5454644 D 1.621 Sunny/0%CC NM, DR, ML 0 1-14 Coquitlam 10U 0514378 10U 0514070 22-Jul-14 Coquitlam River 5454644 5452707 D 1.594 Sunny/20%CC NM, DR, ML 0 15-33 Coquitlam 10U 0514808 10U 0515401 29-Jul-14 Coquitlam River 5455361 5456579 U 1.823 Sunny/0%CC NM,ML 1 1-26 Coquitlam 10U 0515401 10U 0516227 30-Jul-14 Coquitlam River 5456579 5457821 U 1.749 Sunny/0%CC NM,ML 1 1-34 Coquitlam 10U 0516227 10U 0516582 31-Jul-14 Coquitlam River 5457821 5459578 U 1.710 Sunny/0%CC NM,ML 1 1-7 Coquitlam 10U 0516227 10U 0516582 31-Jul-14 Coquitlam River 5457821 5459578 U 1.71 Sunny/0%CC NM,ML 2A 8-21 Coquitlam 10U 0516582 10U 0516766 01-Aug-14 Coquitlam River 5459578 5460502 U 2.143 Sunny/0%CC NM,ML 2A 1-13 Coquitlam 10U 0516766 10U 0516519 05-Aug-14 Coquitlam River 5460502 5461510 U 2.861 Sunny/0%CC NM,ML 2A 1-35 Coquitlam 10U 0516519 10U 0516900 07-Aug-14 Coquitlam River 5461510 5462550 U 2.847 Sunny/0%CC NM,ML 2B 1-26 Coquitlam 10U 0516584 10U 0516930 11-Aug-14 Coquitlam River 5463782 5464728 U 2.749 Sunny/0%CC NM,ML 2B 1-4 Coquitlam 10U 0516584 10U 0516930 11-Aug-14 Coquitlam River 5463782 5464728 U 2.749 Sunny/0%CC NM,ML 3 5-29 Coquitlam 10U 0516930 10U 0516615 12-Aug-14 Coquitlam River 5464728 5465113 U 2.806 Light Rain/100% CC NM,ML 3 1-11 Coquitlam 10U 0516616 10U 0516571 28-Aug-14 Coquitlam River 5465122 5466190 U 2.598 Dry/95%CC NM,ML 4 1-32 Coquitlam 10U 0516571 10U 0516473 29-Aug-14 Coquitlam River 5466190 5466738 U 2.566 Dry/100%CC NM,ML 4 1-17

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 76

APPENDIX B - Raw Data Collected by BCIT Students Bank Mean Mean Mean Mean Pool Depths (m) Unit Length Gradient Pool Date Reach Type Cat. Depth Bank Water Bank Wetted # (m) (%) Type (m) Depth (m) Depth (m) Width (m) Width (m) Max Crest Residual 15-Sep-14 2B 1 P 1 18 0.97 0.25 0.72 20.2 17.2 2 0.4 1.6 S 15-Sep-14 2B 2 G 1 72.8 0.65 0.15 0.50 26.8 24.2 15-Sep-14 2B 3 R 1 21.8 3 0.76 0.45 0.31 33.7 24.5 15-Sep-14 2B 4 G 1 10.7 1.8 0.73 0.33 0.40 35.5 15-Sep-14 2B 5 R 1 75 2 0.85 0.30 0.55 32 23.5 15-Sep-14 2B 6A C 1 25.8 0.82 0.30 0.52 22.2 20.1 15-Sep-14 2B 6B R 2 18.5 0.52 0.19 0.33 19 19 15-Sep-14 2B 7 R 2 33 0.49 0.16 0.33 18.5 15-Sep-14 2B 8 G 2 29 0.77 0.45 0.32 11.3 15-Sep-14 2B 9 R 2 27.7 0.46 0.14 0.32 12.9 15-Sep-14 2B 10 P 2 22.5 0.78 0.10 0.68 9.1 9.1 1 0.2 0.75 DP 15-Sep-14 2B 7A R 1 16.2 0.75 0.28 0.47 15.9 14.4 15-Sep-14 2B 8 R 1 46 2 0.88 0.35 0.53 16 13.5 15-Sep-14 2B 9A G 1 59.2 0.82 0.36 0.46 21.2 21.3 15-Sep-14 2B 10A R 1 36 3 0.42 0.20 0.22 36 36 15-Sep-14 2B 11 R 1 69.1 0.80 0.37 0.43 21.2 17.9 15-Sep-14 2B 12 G 1 143 0 1.08 0.31 0.77 17 21.5 15-Sep-14 2B 13 R 1 34.1 3 0.41 0.16 0.25 39 39 15-Sep-14 2B 14 C 1 14 2 0.77 0.30 0.47 14 10 17-Sep-14 2B 1 G 1 18.3 0.77 0.40 0.37 30 23 17-Sep-14 2B 2 R 1 29.2 1 0.67 0.35 0.32 24 19 17-Sep-14 2B 3 G 1 12.6 0.72 0.10 0.62 27 12 17-Sep-14 2B 4A1 G 2 13.4 0.45 0.15 0.30 16.4 16.4 17-Sep-14 2B 4A2 R 2 33 0.57 0.22 0.35 12.9 10.3 17-Sep-14 2B 4A3 G 2 18.8 0.51 0.18 0.33 6.1 6.1 17-Sep-14 2B 4A4 R 2 35.4 0.54 0.23 0.31 6.9 6.8

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 77

Bank Mean Mean Mean Mean Pool Depths (m) Unit Length Gradient Pool Date Reach Type Cat. Depth Bank Water Bank Wetted # (m) (%) Type (m) Depth (m) Depth (m) Width (m) Width (m) Max Crest Residual 17-Sep-14 2B 4A5 P 2 9.1 0.95 0.28 0.67 5.8 105 20 85 S 17-Sep-14 2B 4A6 R 2 37.5 0.58 0.32 0.26 7.1 7.1 17-Sep-14 2B 4B R 1 83 1 0.68 0.35 0.33 59.9 15.3 17-Sep-14 2B 5B G 1 77 0 0.71 0.25 0.46 16.2 18.8 130 50 80 S 17-Sep-14 2B 6 G 1 60.6 0.67 0.15 0.52 25.5 22.4 17-Sep-14 2B 7 R 1 108 0.72 0.35 0.37 37.2 21.3 17-Sep-14 2B 8 G 1 65 0.75 0.45 0.30 17.4 17.4 17-Sep-14 2B 9 R 1 44 0.57 0.30 0.27 27 23 17-Sep-14 2B 10 G 1 60.6 0 0.70 0.25 0.45 25.4 22 17-Sep-14 2B 11A R 2 108 0.68 0.20 0.48 15.6 7 17-Sep-14 2B 11B G 1 110 1 0.40 0.20 0.20 13 11 17-Sep-14 2B 12 P 1 43.5 0.75 0.20 0.55 20 18 175 40 135 S 17-Sep-14 2B 13 R 1 64 2 0.55 0.35 0.20 23 23 17-Sep-14 2B 14 G 1 36 0.73 0.40 0.33 20 20 17-Sep-14 2B 15 R 1 32.3 1 0.59 0.23 0.36 25.5 25.5 17-Sep-14 2B 16 P 1 66.8 1.57 0.70 0.87 20.4 16.8 17-Sep-14 2A 12 R 1 96 1.1 0.59 0.37 0.22 26.2 24.9 17-Sep-14 2A 11 G 1 122 0.1 0.68 0.35 0.33 26.6 26.4 17-Sep-14 2A 10 R 1 51 0.2 0.67 0.33 0.34 24 18 17-Sep-14 2A 9 R 1 62 0.5 0.68 0.25 0.43 21.1 20.2 17-Sep-14 2A 8 R 1 31 0.1 0.54 0.30 0.24 30 26.4 17-Sep-14 2A 7 G 1 34 0.2 0.43 0.09 0.34 23.2 20.2 17-Sep-14 2A 6 R 1 41 2 0.45 0.45 23.9 11.4 17-Sep-14 2A 5 G 1 98 0.1 0.71 0.23 0.48 21 17 17-Sep-14 2A 4 G 1 154 0.3 0.41 0.20 0.21 26.2 20.5 17-Sep-14 2A 3 G 1 76 0.74 0.20 0.54 22 21 17-Sep-14 2A 2 G 1 160 0.8 0.83 0.40 0.43 17 17

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 78

Bank Mean Mean Mean Mean Pool Depths (m) Unit Length Gradient Pool Date Reach Type Cat. Depth Bank Water Bank Wetted # (m) (%) Type (m) Depth (m) Depth (m) Width (m) Width (m) Max Crest Residual 17-Sep-14 2A 1 R 1 36 0.3 0.83 0.30 0.53 18.5 9 17-Sep-14 2A 4B R 2 37.3 2 0.37 0.20 0.17 11.9 7.5 17-Sep-14 2A 3B G 2 21 2 0.48 0.20 0.28 8.7 7 17-Sep-14 2A 2B P 2 12.8 0.4 1.00 0.20 0.80 11.5 10.4 115 30 85 S 17-Sep-14 2A 1B G 2 126.2 0.4 0.33 0.20 0.13 14.7 12.3 15-Sep-14 2A 16A R 2 83.5 0.5 0.58 0.25 0.33 11.3 9.7 15-Sep-14 2A 16 G 1 109 0.3 0.68 0.30 0.38 24.5 24 15-Sep-14 2A 16 R 1 122.3 1.2 0.55 0.20 0.35 15.9 13.9 15-Sep-14 2A 14 G 1 83 0.6 0.71 0.35 0.36 26.6 22 15-Sep-14 2A 14 R 1 69 2 0.88 0.30 0.58 16.2 14.3 15-Sep-14 2A 13 G 1 75 0.5 0.85 0.25 0.60 23.2 20 15-Sep-14 2A 12 R 1 63.2 1.1 0.73 0.23 0.50 16.2 15 15-Sep-14 2A 11 G 1 52.1 0.2 0.73 0.30 0.43 22.1 19 15-Sep-14 2A 10B R 2 36.8 0.6 0.32 0.07 0.25 10.2 10 15-Sep-14 2A 9B G 2 20.8 0.2 0.58 0.18 0.40 10.7 10 15-Sep-14 2A 8B R 2 107.5 1.8 0.41 0.15 0.26 13.5 13 15-Sep-14 2A 8 R 1 194.6 0.5 0.75 0.30 0.45 19.6 18.6 15-Sep-14 2A 7 G 1 83.5 0.2 0.77 0.30 0.47 30 19.9 15-Sep-14 2A 6 G 1 90.1 0.2 0.45 0.15 0.30 35.7 25 15-Sep-14 2A 5 R 1 73 3 0.65 0.30 0.35 26.6 25.1 15-Sep-14 2A 4 G 1 33.3 2 0.62 0.17 0.45 23 20.8 15-Sep-14 2A 3 R 1 88.2 2 0.59 0.25 0.34 29.5 28 15-Sep-14 2A 2 G 1 31 0.3 0.95 0.30 0.65 22.8 17 15-Sep-14 2A 1 R 1 110.1 0.7 0.61 0.25 0.36 16 15.5

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 79

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 15-Sep-14 2B 1 C B R L B 1 DP 3 15-Sep-14 2B 2 SC LC AR L 1 1 B 1 15-Sep-14 2B 3 SC SG A L 2 2 B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2B 4 G C AR H B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2B 5 B LG A L 1 B 20 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2B 6A B LC B 7 15-Sep-14 2B 6B B C R L B 3 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2B 7 B G R L B 5 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2B 8 B C B 3 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2B 9 B C R L B 3 OV 3 15-Sep-14 2B 10 B 5 3 2 B 1 DP 1 15-Sep-14 2B 7A B LC B 1 15-Sep-14 2B 8 C B A L B 10 15-Sep-14 2B 9A SC LC A L B 2 15-Sep-14 2B 10A B LC 1 B 10 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2B 11 B LC 3 2 1 B 1 15-Sep-14 2B 12 C LG B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2B 13 SC LC A L B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2B 14 B C B 3 17-Sep-14 2B 1 LC SC R L 5 2 2 1 17-Sep-14 2B 2 SC LG A H 9 4 5 B 1 LWD 1 17-Sep-14 2B 3 C G A H 21 12 6 3 LWD 1 C 1 17-Sep-14 2B 4A1 SC G C 1 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2B 4A2 SC G AR H 12 10 2 LWD 1 17-Sep-14 2B 4A3 SC G AR H 1 1 OV 10 17-Sep-14 2B 4A4 SC G A L 3 2 1 17-Sep-14 2B 4A5 SC G 5 3 2 DP 1 17-Sep-14 2B 4A6 LG SC OV 5 17-Sep-14 2B 4B LG SG A H 11 5 5 B 1 LWD 1 17-Sep-14 2B 5B F LG 5 2 B 1 C 1 17-Sep-14 2B 6 G C AR H 5 5 17-Sep-14 2B 7 G C AR H 25 10 13 2 LWD 1 OV 4

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 80

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 17-Sep-14 2B 8 G C AR H 16 15 1 LWD 1 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2B 9 G C AR H 3 3 DP 1 17-Sep-14 2B 10 SG LG 8 4 2 1 C 1 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2B 11A G C AR H 6 4 1 1 C 1 17-Sep-14 2B 11B SG LG 18 9 6 B 1 OV 3 17-Sep-14 2B 12 G S AR H C 1 DP 6 17-Sep-14 2B 13 LG SG 9 6 C 3 OV 2 17-Sep-14 2B 14 C G AR H 4 3 1 C 1 17-Sep-14 2B 15 LG SG 1 1 B 1 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2B 16 G S 1 1 DP 15 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2A 12 SC LG 7 3 4 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2A 11 LC SC OV 1 17-Sep-14 2A 10 LC LG A L 17-Sep-14 2A 9 LC SC 6 2 4 LWD 1 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2A 8 SC LG R L 6 3 1 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2A 7 SC LG AR H 2 1 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2A 6 LC SC 3 3 17-Sep-14 2A 5 LC SC A H OV 1 C 1 17-Sep-14 2A 4 SC LG AR H 2 2 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2A 3 SC LG AR H OV 1 C 1 17-Sep-14 2A 2 SC LG 6 3 3 OV 3 17-Sep-14 2A 1 SC LG A L 6 5 1 LWD 1 C 1 17-Sep-14 2A 4B SC LG A H 1 1 OV 1 17-Sep-14 2A 3B LG F OV 1 17-Sep-14 2A 2B F LG B 4 17-Sep-14 2A 1B SC LG 1 1 LWD 1 OV 5 15-Sep-14 2A 16A LC SC 2 1 1 B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2A 16 SC LC B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2A 16 B SC R L 12 10 2 B 1 15-Sep-14 2A 14 SC LG 2 2 15-Sep-14 2A 14 B LC 1 B 1 DP 1 15-Sep-14 2A 13 LC SC A L B 1 OV 1

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 81

Unit Bed Material Total Functional LWD Cover Date Reach # Dom Sub Spawn LWD 10-20cm 20-50cm >50cm Type % Type % 15-Sep-14 2A 12 LC B B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2A 11 SC B 2 1 1 B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2A 10B LC B AR L 3 2 B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2A 9B LC B B 1 OV 4 15-Sep-14 2A 8B B SC AR L 4 3 B 1 OV 3 15-Sep-14 2A 8 B LC 2 1 1 B 2 15-Sep-14 2A 7 LC SC 2 1 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2A 6 SC LC A L OV 1 15-Sep-14 2A 5 LC SC 5 1 1 B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2A 4 SC LC AR L 2 2 15-Sep-14 2A 3 SC B 2 1 B 1 OV 1 15-Sep-14 2A 2 SC B 1 1 B 1 DP 5 15-Sep-14 2A 1 LC B 2 1 B 1

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 82

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Length Velocity # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m) Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 15-Sep-14 2B 1 M YF 1 0.18 937 936 15-Sep-14 2B 2 M YF 1 5485 & 5490 & 15-Sep-14 2B 3 MB 5.5 PD D YF 1 1 5486 5491 15-Sep-14 2B 4 M YF 1 0.63 946 945 15-Sep-14 2B 5 SC M YF 1 1.2 5492 5495 15-Sep-14 2B 6A MB 21.1 M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2B 6B M YF 2 0.41 947 948 15-Sep-14 2B 7 M YF 2 0.3 949 950 15-Sep-14 2B 8 M YF 2 0.5 953 951 15-Sep-14 2B 9 M YF 2 0.39 957 954 15-Sep-14 2B 10 JW 9.1 M YF 3 0.97 959 958 15-Sep-14 2B 7A MB 16.2 M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2B 8 M YF 1 0.47 5499 5496 15-Sep-14 2B 9A M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2B 10A M YF 1 0.94 5509 5503 15-Sep-14 2B 11 M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2B 12 MB 1 M YF 1 3 5511 5510 15-Sep-14 2B 13 M YF 1 1.5 5515 5513 15-Sep-14 2B 14 M YF 1 1.71 969 966 17-Sep-14 2B 1 D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2B 2 SC G 14.3 3.5 PD 29.2 D YF 1 407 406 17-Sep-14 2B 3 EB D YF 1 0.14 17-Sep-14 2B 4A1 SC good 27.4 2.05 D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2B 4A2 JM 3 D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2B 4A3 D YF 3 17-Sep-14 2B 4A4 D YF 4 17-Sep-14 2B 4A5 LJ 2 D PS 2 17-Sep-14 2B 4A6 S SHR 1 17-Sep-14 2B 4B SC P 29.8 5 DW 83 EB D YF 1 409 408 17-Sep-14 2B 5B MB 30 S SHR 1 410 411 17-Sep-14 2B 6 EB D YF 1 0.5

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 83

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Length Velocity # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m) Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 17-Sep-14 2B 7 EB MB D YF 1 0.59 17-Sep-14 2B 8 D YF 1 0.54 17-Sep-14 2B 9 EB D YF 1 0.67 17-Sep-14 2B 10 MB 10 D YF 1 412 413 17-Sep-14 2B 11A EB D YF 2 0.83 17-Sep-14 2B 11B MB D YF 1 415 414 17-Sep-14 2B 12 EB D YF 1 0.33 17-Sep-14 2B 13 EB 64 D YF 1 417 416 17-Sep-14 2B 14 EB D YF 1 0.45 17-Sep-14 2B 15 EB 32.3 D YF 1 420 421 17-Sep-14 2B 16 SC good 20 8 EB 66.8 D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2A 12 EB 15 M YF 1 17-Sep-14 2A 11 D YF 1 42 43 17-Sep-14 2A 10 D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2A 9 D YF 1 40 41 17-Sep-14 2A 8 M YF 1 17-Sep-14 2A 7 D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2A 6 D YF 1 38 39 17-Sep-14 2A 5 D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2A 4 SC P 69 4 D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2A 3 D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2A 2 LR 20 D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2A 1 PD D YF 1 17-Sep-14 2A 4B D YF 2 36 37 17-Sep-14 2A 3B D YF 1 34 35 17-Sep-14 2A 2B D YF 1 31 17-Sep-14 2A 1B MC 25.4 MB D YF 1 30 32 15-Sep-14 2A 16A M YF 1 24 25 15-Sep-14 2A 16 M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2A 16 M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2A 14 EB 10 LR 10 M YF 1

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 84

Off-channel Habitat Disturbance Indicators Riparian Vegetation Photo # Unit Date Reach Length Width Length Length Velocity # Type Access (m) (m) Type (m) Type (m) Type Structure Closure U/S D/S 15-Sep-14 2A 14 M YF 1 22 23 15-Sep-14 2A 13 M YF 1 19 20 15-Sep-14 2A 12 M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2A 11 EB 4 M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2A 10B M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2A 9B M YF 2 1010 1011 15-Sep-14 2A 8B M YF 1 1006 1009 15-Sep-14 2A 8 M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2A 7 EB MB 49.4 M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2A 6 M YF 2 1002 1005 15-Sep-14 2A 5 DW 7.3 M YF 1 12 11 15-Sep-14 2A 4 MB MC 9.4 M YF 1 15-Sep-14 2A 3 M YF 1 994 1001 15-Sep-14 2A 2 DW 35.7 M YF 1 9 10 15-Sep-14 2A 1 M YF 1

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 85

APPENDIX C - Level 1 - Habitat Survey Data Form

Lower Coquitlam River Fish Habitat Assessment April 2015 FINAL Report 2014 Page 86

APPENDIX D - Level 1 – Coquitlam River FHAP Training Presentation

Level 1 Fisheries Habitat Assessment

Don McCubbing Jason Ladell

- InStream Fisheries Research Inc.

2014 Level 1 Fisheries Habitat Assessment

- The Watershed Restoration Program (WRP) was a provincial initiative undertaken for the restoration of lands impacted by past forest practices. - A series of technical circulars were produced to assist in planning watershed restoration projects - Johnson, N.T. and P.A. Slaney. 1996. Fish Habitat Assessment Procedures. Watershed Restoration Technical Circular No. 8. Baseline Assessment Procedure

- Allows identification of opportunities to increase depressed stocks of salmonids in streams

1. Overview summary: existing information from maps, reports, databases, etc. 2. Reconnaissance Level 1 1Survey 3. Detailed site-specific Level 2 survey

Level 1 Fisheries Habitat Assessment

- Background Information:

Identify the watershed Watershed code Topographic maps The Fisheries Information Summary System (FISS) provides spatially represented summary level fish and fish habitat data for waterbodies throughout British Columbia and the Yukon EcoCat provides access to digital reports and publications, and their associated files such as maps, datasets, and published inventory information. Level 1 Fisheries Habitat Assessment

- Background Information:

- Identify the target species: Pacific salmon, kokanee, resident or anadromous trout and/or char Level 1 Fisheries Habitat Assessment

- Background Information:

- Summarize trends in abundance from existing information Level 1 Fisheries Habitat Assessment

- Background Information:

- Establish stream reaches: homogeneous section of stream characterized by uniform discharge, gradient, channel morphology, channel confinement, and streambed and bank materials Level 1 Fisheries Habitat Assessment

- Background Information:

- Identify critical or heavily-used reaches - Identify areas of special concern (e.g potential barriers) Level 1 Fisheries Habitat Assessment

- Background Information:

- Identify the target species: Pacific salmon, kokanee, resident or anadromous trout and/or char - Summarize trends in abundance from existing information - Establish stream reaches: homogeneous section of stream characterized by uniform discharge, gradient, channel morphology, channel confinement, and streambed and bank materials - Identify critical or heavily-used reaches - Identify areas of special concern (e.g potential barriers) Level 1 Field Assessment

Provides the quantitative information needed initially to define and plan restoration projects

By using existing and overview information, you can usually restrict the level 1 field survey to a relatively small portion of the watershed where habitat information will be useful in defining opportunities for effective restoration projects Level 1 Field Assessment

Provides the quantitative information needed initially to define and plan restoration projects

The habitat features of particular importance are: 1. adult holding pools 2. spawning gravel quantity and quality 3. (rearing) pool area and frequency 4. cover in pools and riffles 5. LWD frequency and distribution 6. substrate characteristics of the stream bed 7. off-channel habitat 8. nutrient concentrations during the summer growing season

Level 1 Field Assessment

Provides the quantitative information needed initially to define and plan restoration projects

The habitat features of particular importance are: 1. adult holding pools 2. spawning gravel quantity and quality 3. (rearing) pool area and frequency 4. cover in pools and riffles 5. LWD frequency and distribution 6. substrate characteristics of the stream bed 7. off-channel habitat 8. nutrient concentrations during the summer growing season

Level 1 Field Assessment

Provides the quantitative information needed initially to define and plan restoration projects

The habitat features of particular importance are: 1. adult holding pools 2. spawning gravel quantity and quality 3. (rearing) pool area and frequency 4. cover in pools and riffles 5. LWD frequency and distribution 6. substrate characteristics of the stream bed 7. off-channel habitat 8. nutrient concentrations during the summer growing season Level 1 Field Assessment

Provides the quantitative information needed initially to define and plan restoration projects

The habitat features of particular importance are: 1. adult holding pools 2. spawning gravel quantity and quality 3. (rearing) pool area and frequency 4. cover in pools and riffles 5. LWD frequency and distribution 6. substrate characteristics of the stream bed 7. off-channel habitat 8. nutrient concentrations during the summer growing season Level 1 Field Assessment

Provides the quantitative information needed initially to define and plan restoration projects

The habitat features of particular importance are: 1. adult holding pools 2. spawning gravel quantity and quality 3. (rearing) pool area and frequency 4. cover in pools and riffles 5. LWD frequency and distribution 6. substrate characteristics of the stream bed 7. off-channel habitat 8. nutrient concentrations during the summer growing season

Level 1 Field Assessment

Provides the quantitative information needed initially to define and plan restoration projects

The habitat features of particular importance are: 1. adult holding pools 2. spawning gravel quantity and quality 3. (rearing) pool area and frequency 4. cover in pools and riffles 5. LWD frequency and distribution 6. substrate characteristics of the stream bed 7. off-channel habitat 8. nutrient concentrations during the summer growing season

Level 1 Field Assessment

Provides the quantitative information needed initially to define and plan restoration projects

The habitat features of particular importance are: 1. adult holding pools 2. spawning gravel quantity and quality 3. (rearing) pool area and frequency 4. cover in pools and riffles 5. LWD frequency and distribution 6. substrate characteristics of the stream bed 7. off-channel habitat 8. nutrient concentrations during the summer growing season Level 1 Field Assessment

Provides the quantitative information needed initially to define and plan restoration projects

The habitat features of particular importance are: 1. adult holding pools 2. spawning gravel quantity and quality 3. (rearing) pool area and frequency 4. cover in pools and riffles 5. LWD frequency and distribution 6. substrate characteristics of the stream bed 7. off-channel habitat 8. nutrient concentrations during the summer growing season Level 1 Field Assessment

Provides the quantitative information needed initially to define and plan restoration projects

To evaluate habitat conditions, the level 1 assessment compares the values of the above habitat features within the reach to expected values. If watershed or regional criteria for habitat conditions do not exist, then use the diagnostic criteria of TABLE 5 to evaluate conditions in the reach

Level 1 Field Assessment

Pre-Survey Planning:

• survey locations and scope • the survey design • survey methods • access and transportation constraints • required permits and operational regulations • training and safety issues • the roles and responsibilities of the field crew Level 1 Field Assessment

Pre-Survey Planning:

Because habitat characteristics may vary with discharge, do the survey under summer base flow conditions. Examine seasonal discharge patterns for the stream or for nearby streams from Water Survey of Canada discharge records to identify likely base flow conditions. Avoid doing surveys during changes in flow conditions (e.g., after a rainstorm or during snowmelt). Be aware of regional timing windows for instream fisheries work that might affect your survey 2012 Daily Discharge for COQUITLAM RIVER AT PORT COQUITLAM (08MH002) 80

70

60

50

40

Discharge (CMS) Discharge 30

20

10

0 1-Jan 1-Feb 1-Mar 1-Apr 1-May 1-Jun 1-Jul 1-Aug 1-Sep 1-Oct 1-Nov 1-Dec DATE

Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Unit Type:

The level 1 fish habitat assessment divides each stream reach into strata consisting of distinct, naturally-occurring habitat units

The habitat units distinguished in a level 1 assessment are: • pools (both scour pools and dammed pools) • non-turbulent fast-flowing water (glides, broadly defined), • turbulent fast-flowing water (riffles, broadly defined), • cascades (higher-gradient “riffles”), and • other (wetland complexes that lack an identifiable primary channel, sloughs, lakes, areas of sub-surface flow, or areas where the channel cannot be observed (e.g., under large log jams) Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Unit Type:

The level 1 fish habitat assessment divides each stream reach into strata consisting of distinct, naturally-occurring habitat units

The habitat units distinguished in a level 1 assessment are: • pools (both scour pools and dammed pools) • non-turbulent fast-flowing water (glides, broadly defined), • turbulent fast-flowing water (riffles, broadly defined), • cascades (higher-gradient “riffles”), and • other (wetland complexes that lack an identifiable primary channel, sloughs, lakes, areas of sub-surface flow, or areas where the channel cannot be observed (e.g., under large log jams)

Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Unit Type:

The level 1 fish habitat assessment divides each stream reach into strata consisting of distinct, naturally-occurring habitat units

The habitat units distinguished in a level 1 assessment are: • pools (both scour pools and dammed pools) • non-turbulent fast-flowing water (glides, broadly defined), • turbulent fast-flowing water (riffles, broadly defined), • cascades (higher-gradient “riffles”), and • other (wetland complexes that lack an identifiable primary channel, sloughs, lakes, areas of sub-surface flow, or areas where the channel cannot be observed (e.g., under large log jams)

Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Unit Type:

The level 1 fish habitat assessment divides each stream reach into strata consisting of distinct, naturally-occurring habitat units

The habitat units distinguished in a level 1 assessment are: • pools (both scour pools and dammed pools) • non-turbulent fast-flowing water (glides, broadly defined), • turbulent fast-flowing water (riffles, broadly defined), • cascades (higher-gradient “riffles”), and • other (wetland complexes that lack an identifiable primary channel, sloughs, lakes, areas of sub-surface flow, or areas where the channel cannot be observed (e.g., under large log jams)

Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Unit Type:

The level 1 fish habitat assessment divides each stream reach into strata consisting of distinct, naturally-occurring habitat units

The habitat units distinguished in a level 1 assessment are: • pools (both scour pools and dammed pools) • non-turbulent fast-flowing water (glides, broadly defined), • turbulent fast-flowing water (riffles, broadly defined), • cascades (higher-gradient “riffles”), and • other (wetland complexes that lack an identifiable primary channel, sloughs, lakes, areas of sub-surface flow, or areas where the channel cannot be observed (e.g., under large log jams) Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Unit Type: POOLS

Pools are areas of (relatively) slower, deeper water with a concave bottom profile, finer sediments, and a water surface gradient near 0%

The residual depth is the difference between the maximum pool depth and the depth at the pool outlet, and approximates the pool depth at zero flow Maximum depth in m (± 0.05 m) at the deepest point Riffle crest depth in m is the water depth measured at the riffle crest (i.e., at the pool overflow or pool control element) of the pool. Pool-like habitat units must have both the following minimum dimensions Level 1 Field Assessment Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Unit Types:

RIFFLES are areas of turbulent, fast-flowing water. In alluvial reaches, they are commonly shallow, moderate-gradient areas with gravel or cobble substrates, bed material projecting above the water surface, and with obvious surface turbulence. GLIDES include all areas of fast-flowing, non-turbulent water. Glides (and riffles) have relatively flat bottoms in cross-section. Pool tailouts, the elongated transitional zone of moderately-shallow, flat-bottomed water with smooth, laminar flow that occur between pools and riffles in low- gradient channels, are a common form of glide. CASCADES are steep, stepped “riffles” of bedrock or emergent cobble or boulders in channels with gradients greater than about 4%

Level 1 Field Assessment

Survey Methods:

Level 1 fish habitat surveys require the following equipment: 1. fibreglass surveyor’s tape (50 m length) 2. surveyor’s rod or metre stick (0.01m divisions) 3. clinometer or Abney level 4. hip chain (metre divisions) 5. 1:20,000 (or larger) map 6. handheld Geographic Positioning System (GPS) unit 7. thermometer (or recording thermograph) 8. clip board 9. level 1 habitat survey forms 10. waterproof field note book 11. pencils 12. camera and film 13. first aid equipment 14. optical or electronic rangefinder (optional) 15. flow meter (optional).

Level 1 Field Assessment

General Information:

You will have the gazetteered name and watershed code from your Overview Assessment. Note weather conditions and other factors that might affect the survey Record the habitat unit type for sampled units as: • P = pool • G = glide • R = riffle • C = cascade, or • O = other. Record the nature of the “other” habitat unit in the comment field. Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Habitat Unit Category You should distinguish habitat units in secondary channels or small habitat units that do not span the main channel from major habitat units in the main channel. Do not neglect secondary channels; they are often important habitats for juvenile fish. Categorize habitat units as: 1 = primary habitat units. Primary units are habitat units in the main stream channel which occupy more than 50% of the wetted width. 2 = secondary habitat units. Secondary units occur in minor channels that are isolated from the main channel by a vegetated island with perennial plants greater than 1 metre in height. In braided reaches, where many secondary channels occur, record only the habitat units in the dominant channels and note that the channel is braided.

Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Habitat Unit Category You should distinguish habitat units in secondary channels or small habitat units that do not span the main channel from major habitat units in the main channel. Do not neglect secondary channels; they are often important habitats for juvenile fish. Categorize habitat units as: 3 = tertiary habitat units. Tertiary units are significant, identifiable habitat units within the main stream channel that meet the minimum size criteria but which occupy less than 50% of the wetted width (e.g., they are embedded within a larger habitat unit, or are separated from the primary unit by an obstruction or a gravel bar that lacks perennial vegetation). In a level 1 survey you would normally distinguish only those tertiary units that are significant as fish habitat (e.g., deep lateral scour pools); otherwise combine them with the larger adjacent unit that meets the minimum size criterion. Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Length (m) Measure the length along the thalweg of the habitat unit in metres, using a calibrated surveyor’s tape (or laser). If the thalweg is not accessible (e.g., because of water depth), take the length measurement at mid-point on the unit’s boundary. For sinuous units, take the length as the sum of straight-line lengths along the thalweg Gradient (%) Use a clinometer or Abney level to measure the gradient (± 0.5%) of the water surface over the habitat unit. Mark the surveyor’s rod at the eye level of the measurer. The rod man holds the surveyor’s rod vertical at the far boundary of the habitat unit while the measurer sights the clinometer on this mark to make the gradient measurement Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Mean Water Depth (m) Determine the mean depth (± 0.05 m) of the habitat unit by averaging 3 depths taken ¼, ½, and ¾ of the distance across a transect perpendicular to the flow at a “representative” site within the habitat unit Survey multiple sites if the water depth is highly varied in a unit Bankfull Water Depth (m) Measure the vertical distance (± 0.05 m) from a horizontal line at the height of the bankfull width to the water surface at the “representative” site at which you measured the bankfull width The presence of rooted vegetation often indicates the extent of bankfull width Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Mean Wetted Width, Ww (m) Measure the wetted width (± 0.1 m) of the habitat unit as the horizontal distance perpendicular to the channel axis from water’s edge on one side to water’s edge on the opposite side at the “representative” site used above to determine mean depth Mean Bankfull Channel Width, Wb (m) Measure the bankfull channel width (± 0.1 m) at a “representative” site as the horizontal distance perpendicular to the channel axis between the tops of the streambanks on opposite sides of the stream • do not include vegetated islands (i.e., islands with perennial terrestial vegetation more than 1 metre in height). If multiple channels are separated by vegetated islands, sum the separate bankfull channel width measurements Level 1 Field Assessment Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Maximum Pool Depth (m) For pools, measure (or estimate, if necessary) the maximum water depth (± 0.05 m). Riffle Crest (Pool Outlet) Depth (m) For pools, measure the water depth (± 0.05 m) at the pool outlet Residual Depth (m) Calculate the residual depth (± 0.05 m) of the pool as the difference between the maximum pool depth and the riffle crest depth (or pool outlet depth). Note that pools must meet both minimum surface area and minimum residual depth criteria to be counted. Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Pool Type Record the pool type as: S = scour pool, formed by scouring around or adjacent to an obstruction such as a log, boulder, or root wad or by flow convergence where two channels join D = dammed pool, formed by impoundment behind a channel spanning obstruction such as a beaver dam, log, or log jam U = unknown (unable to classify) Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Dominant and Sub-Dominant Bed Materials Estimate and record the size-class of the substrate material that covers the largest proportion (dominant) and the second-largest proportion (subdominant) of the habitat unit. Categorize substrates as:

• F = sands, silts, clays or fine organic material (< 2 mm diameter) • SG =small gravels (2 - 16 mm) • LG =large gravels (16 - 64 mm) • SC = small cobble (64 - 128 mm) • LC = large cobbles (128 - 256 mm) • B = boulders (256 - 4000 mm) • R = bedrock (> 4000 mm)

Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form: Spawning Gravel Amount and Type Spawning gravels are gravels that are located in areas where water depths greater than 15 cm and water velocities between about 0.3 and 1.0 m·s-1 are expected during the spawning season. For anadromous salmon, spawning gravel patches should be 1-2 m2 in area with a particle size between about 10-150 mm. For (small) resident trout and char, spawning gravel patches should be greater than 0.1 m2 in area with a particle size between 10-75 mm. Pay particular attention to pool tailouts and riffle crests as potential spawning sites.

Record the presence of suitable spawning gravels for the target fish species as: • N = no suitable gravel patches in the habitat unit • L = little suitable spawning gravels (e.g., isolated pockets) • H = extensive areas of spawning gravels

Record the type of spawning gravel as: • R = suitable for resident trout and char • A = suitable for anadromous salmon • AR = suitable for both resident trout and anadromous salmon Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Large Woody Debris Tally Large woody debris (LWD) is a piece of dead wood, having a diameter 10 cm or larger over a minimum 2 m length, that intrudes into the bankfull channel Functional LWD Influence channel geomorphology by causing scour or impoundment. Count as functional LWD only those LWD pieces that are the primary cause of the formation or geometry of a pool. Tally functional LWD by three size classes (10-20 cm diameter, 20-50 cm diameter and > 50 cm diameter)

Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form: Cover (% by type) Cover is a structural element in the wetted channel or within 1 metre of the water surface that serves to visually isolate fish and/or to provide suitable microhabitats where fish can hide, rest or feed Estimate the percentage of the total surface area of the habitat unit that is covered by the following cover types: • SWD = small woody debris (i.e., smaller than the criteria given previously) • LWD = large woody debris, as defined above • B = boulders • C = undercut banks • DP = deep pool (i.e., the portion of a pool with a depth > 1 m) • OV = overhanging vegetation within 1 metre of the water surface • IV = instream vegetation • O = other (i.e. rip-rap) Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Cover (% by type)

Record the percentage of the total surface area of the habitat unit for (up to) the three dominant cover types. Record the amount of cover as: • N = no cover in the habitat unit, • TR = cover element is present but likely comprises less than 2% of the habitat unit area, or • Numeric value = the estimated percentage of the total area by cover type. Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Off-channel Habitat Record the presence of off-channel habitat that may be used by fish as refuges or rearing areas at high flows. Pay particular attention to relict channels in the adjacent floodplain which have been isolated by lateral movement of the stream and which could be re-connected to the stream as a restoration project. Note any ground water flows within isolated sidechannels. Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Off-channel Habitat Categorize off-channel habitat as: • SC = sidechannels • SL = sloughs (blind-ended channels) • PD = off-channel ponds • WL = seasonally-flooded wetlands

Measure or estimate the length and area of the off-channel habitat unit, and note fish access to the off-channel area as: • N = no access to fish • P = accessible only at high flows • G = accessible at most flows Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Disturbance Indicators: Record type and length Table 2. Indicators of recent channel disturbance

Indicator Feature Code Bed Characteristics 1. Extensive areas of scour 2. Extensive areas of (unvegetated) bar DW 3. Large, extensive sediment wedges WG 4. Elevated mid-channel bars MB 5. Extensive riffle zones LR 6. Limited pool frequency and extent FP Channel pattern 1. Multiple channels (braiding) MC Banks 1. Eroding banks EB 2. Isolated sidechannels or backchannels BC LWD 1. Most LWD parallel to banks PD 2. Recently formed LWD jams JM Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Riparian Vegetation Type Record the dominant vegetation type in the riparian area within 20 m of the stream channel as: • N = largely unvegetated, with much bare mineral soil visible • G = grasslands or bog • SH = shrub/herb, dominated by herbaceous or shrubby vegetation • D = deciduous forest • C = coniferous forest • M = mixed deciduous-coniferous forest Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Riparian Structural Stage Record the structural stage of the dominant vegetation in the adjacent riparian area as: • INIT = the non-vegetated or initial colonization stage following disturbance, with less than 5% cover • SHR = shrub/herb stage with less than 10% tree cover • PS = pole-sapling stage, with trees overtopping the shrub layer, usually less than 15-20 years old • YF = young forest. Self-thinning is evident and the forest canopy is differentiating into distinct layers. Stand age is typically 30-80 years • MF = mature forest with well-developed understory

Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Overstream Canopy Closure Categorize the extent of canopy closure over the stream (i.e., the proportion of the surface area of the stream that is covered by the projecting riparian canopy) as: 0 = none 1 = 1-20% covered 2 = 21-40% covered 3 = 41-70% covered 4 = 71-90% covered 5 = > 90% covered Level 1 Field Assessment

Habitat Survey Data Form:

Fish Useable Habitat Area Useable steelhead fry and parr habitat was is visually estimated within each habitat unit. Briefly, within a given habitat unit usable wetted area for steelhead trout was determined as a percentage of total wetted area by visual methods. Usable fry habitat was evaluated as being less than 20 cm in depth and with a velocity greater than 0.1 ms-1 but not exceeding 0.5 ms-1. Usable trout parr habitat was evaluated as having a depth range of 20-50 cm and a velocity of 0.2 to 0.6 ms-1